mugs: 3 u m 1%» Lung; . 5.”: z .F .P, . $... ‘(4‘0 unmade” 2... .....§. . .r . 311%. . ‘ 1... If .12.! n . . 7: .0. 2 gggw . 2%.... . p . .uv.) . . a . .. . .=.;...E¢b. «fl _¢M¢- 7.007.. LIBRARY Michigan State University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled Female Characters and Russian Literature presented by Beyhan Asma has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Doctoral degree in Russian Literature WLKW #W% {6er Major professor December 12, 2001 Date MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record. To AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 6’01 c!CIRC/DateDuo.p85-p.ts FEMALE CHARACTERS AND RUSSIAN LITERATURE By Beyhan Asma A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Linguistics and Germanic, Slavic, Asian and African Languages 2001 ABSTRACT FEMALE CHARACTERS AND RUSSIAN LITERATURE By Beyhan Asma This dissertation consists of five parts: Chapter One (“A Survey of Female Characters in Russian Literature: An Introduction”); Chapter Two (“Annotated Bibliography of Female Characters in Russian Literature (1920-1999)”); Conclusion; Subject Index; and Author Index. It is established that many prominent Russian writers, male and female, have consistently addressed women’s issues. Indeed, they have steadfastly fought for the strengthening of the human rights of women, including calls for education, professional equality with men, freedom to shape the lives of their families, the right to respectful relationships, and the recognition of progressive ideas among women and men. The above t0pics have been treated in various ways, and are present in the works of Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol, Turgenev, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Ostrovsky, Chekhov, Pasternak, Pavlova, Akhmatova, Tsvetaeva, and Gippius. It is likewise established that female writers, Pavlova in particular, look upon their female characters “tenderly” as compared to male characters. As for male writers, their treatment of female characters varies markedly from writer to writer. The Byronic postures of Pushkin and Lermontov, the liberal persona of Turgenev, the sociological probing of Chekhov and Gogol, the penetrating psychology of Dostoevsky, the teleological mind of Tolstoy, and the trends and counter trends generated by these various stances and predispositions all resulted in mixed attitudes, and the degree of their misogyny fluctuated. This fluctuation in attitudes towards female characters almost disappears with the female characters of female writers. Pavlova is the only female writer who occasionally ridicules her own female characters. Tsvetaeva and Akhmatova display very little animosity towards female characters. All data have been collected from reading critical works (in English and Russian) and the writers’ original works. Copyright by BEYHAN ASMA 2001 This dissertation is dedicated to my beloved mother, father and brother ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I express deep gratitude for the guidance, support, advice, and enthusiasm given to me by my major academic advisor, Professor Munir Sendich. I wish to thank him for his generous gift of time during all phases of this dissertation, and for his wise counsel, quick wit, and sensitivity that helped make a very difficult project much easier and more meaningful. I wish also to thank Professors David K. Prestel, Felix Raskolnikov and Alan Fisher for their critical remarks on my dissertation. Also I am grateful to Elvira Wilbur, the outside reader, for her reading of my dissertation. Help rendered by the department secretaries is likewise appreciated. My gratitude extends to the libraries at Michigan State University and the University of Michigan for their assistance in finding all necessary bibliographic materials. My profound gratitude includes the Turkish Educational Ministry for giving me the opportunity and financial support necessary to complete my graduate studies at Michigan State University. A special thanks is extended to my dear family for their unwavering support, patience, love, and continuous encouragement throughout my life. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS OF PERIODICALS viii CHAPTER ONE: SURVEY OF FEMALE CHARACTERS IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE: AN INTRODUCTION 1-26 CHAPTER TWO: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF FEMALE CHARACTERS IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE (1920-1999) 27-116 CONCLUSION l 1 7- 123 SUBJECT INDEX 124-133 AUTHOR INDEX 134-146 vii KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS OF PERIODICALS ASEER Bookman Col Engl Contempt R Criticism FMLS Form R Genre Harper’s M Harvard Slavic S Horizon Int L Message MLR Mod Lang R Mosaic MSS Neophil NYR Bks Poet Lore Psychology Quarterly R RCF Resch St RLJ RLT Rus Lit Rus R Rus Stud Sat R Lit SEEJ SEER Slav R SLRJ Symposium The Chimera Theatre Theatre Arts M Theatre S Ulb R Western Hum R Yale R American Slavic and East European Review Bookman College English Contemporary Review Criticism Forum for Modern Language Studies Fortnightly Review Genre Harper’s Magazine Harvard Slavic Studies Horizon Intuition to Learning Message Modern Language Review Modern Language Review Mosaic Melbourne Slavic Studies Neophilologus New York Review of Books Poet Lore Psychology Quarterly Review Review of Contemporary Fiction Research Studies Russian Language Journal Russian Language Journal Russian Literature Russian Review Russian Student Saturday Review of Literature Slavic and East European Journal Slavonic and East EurOpean Review Slavic Review Saint Louis University Research Journal of Arts and Sciences Symposium The Chimera Theatre Theatre Arts Monthly Theatre Survey Ulbandus Review Western Humanities Review Yale Review viii CHAPTER ONE SURVEY OF FEMALE CHARACTERS IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE: An Introduction Chapter I functions as a preface to the annotated bibliography (Chapter II) and strives to examine female characters in Russian literature in a broad context. The chapter is divided into thirteen sections with each section focusing on critical attitudes towards the female characters of a given writer. The chapter begins with criticism of Pushkin’s major female characters, Tatyana and Olga, and then moves to the works of Lermontov, Gogol, Turgenev, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Ostrovsky, Chekhov and Pasternak. The focus then shifts to female characters portrayed by women authors. Karolina Pavlova’s heroine from A Double Life, and Akhmatova’s, Tsvetaeva’s and Gippius’s major works. Male Writers 1. Aleksandr Pushkin Criticism of Pushkin’s female characters from Evgeny Onegin focuses on Tatyana. One critic (Olga Peters Hasty, 1999.1)l reads Pushkin perfunctorily and argues that Tatyana is important as a transitional figure in a period when the static feminine images of hagiography and folk literature were evolving first into the formulaic character types of Romanticism and, ultimately, into realistic portrayals of individuals. Particularly illustrative of the transition from the world of folk tales to contemporary Romanticism is ' Further references are to be found in the annotated bibliography. The first four digits refer to the year of publication, with number(s) following the period corresponding to the entries of that year. Onegin’s dream sequence, which combines the fantastic formula of a folk tale with the psychological probing of modern realism. . Another critic, Victor Shklovsky (1983.8), maintains that Tatyana represents a perfect balance of the internal and external elements of characterization. Sonia Hoisington (1988.2) adds that Tatyana embodies both the moral and cultural traditional lives inherent in Pushkin’s art. Yet Tatyana is neither an illusive woman figure nor a symbol, but a persuasive representation of an actual woman. Sam Driver makes the point that Tatyana is depicted against a social context which contributes to her development in meaningful ways (1989.3). Another Pushkinist, Douglas Clayton, says in his Ices and Flames (1985.1), that Tatyana is a type of positive beauty, the apotheosis of Russian womanhood. He argues that she is a faithful woman with social and moral values, unlike Tolstoy’s Anna. He goes on to state that Evgeny Onegin is one of the great works of nineteenth-century Russian literature, incorporating a symbolization of romantic love that is brought out through Tatyana’s characterization. There is a contrast between Tatyana’s and Olga’s roles in Pushkin’s novel. The concept of ‘love’, as it relates to Olga, is portrayed as devilish and alien, which is in sharp contrast to the constancy and warmth related to Tatyana. Meanwhile, Monica Greenleaf describes Evgeny Onegin as an excellent original creation containing the spirit of Russian women (1994.3). She points out that the poem depicts female characters who are romantic and realistic. Turbin (1996.3) states that Pushkin breathes an atmosphere of typical Russian life into his female characters and portrays real Russian women in whom the main trends in the development of Russian society may be discerned. Evgeny Onegin, according to this view, is written in a sociological and psychological context illustrating Russian women, their lives, behaviors, and actions. Turbin concludes that Tatyana is a typical country girl illustrated in literary form. Indeed, most critics accept the fact of Tatyana’s complex nature. They claim that although she is essentially a representative eighteenth-century female characacter, she is at the same time, symbolic of Russian life and its destiny. There is a consensus in Pushkin criticism that Evgeny Onegin is something of a social document because it provides factual portrayals of women’s lives in Russian society of the nineteenth century. It, furthermore, combines the humorous style of Gogol and Dostoevsky, the broad narratives of Tolstoy, and the skillful fictions of Turgenev with the harmony of women characters in Russian literature. It stands as a significant contribution to Western culture with its exotic personality, Russian setting, and different female identities. 2. Mikhail Lermontov Indeed, Lermontov took more realistic portrayals of women a step further in A Hero of Our Time. The novel can be credited with establishing the emphasis on the depiction of female characters rather than merely on the action (1962.6). A Hero of Our Time is dominated by complex, strong, multifaceted female characters who are seen from many points of view (1955.5). The main women characters of Princess Mary and Bela evoke the emotional interest of the reader by virtue of their strongly individual personalities (1967.3). In contrast, the male characters of the novel embody inferior attributes such as passivity and lack of religious faith. Harry Moore maintains that Lermontov wrote a magnificent piece of Russian fiction that examines the psychology of women who are extraordinarily enigmatic. The role of tragic and romantic villains can be seen in the realistic portraits of all Lermontov’s major female characters such as Bela, Vera, and Princess Mary. Lermontov’s Byronic women characters have a mystical inner contradiction and complexity seldom matched by Romantic female characters. The character of Bela is discussed as being an image of the naive, weak, maiden, in complete contrast to the Romantic conception of a strong Caucasian woman. She is described from a realistic point of view within the travel notes structure of the novel. The novel’s sections Bela and T aman are full of Romantic fantasies. Love occurs in the different parts of A Hero of Our Time and women are personally reminded about something or someone connected with it in their own lives (1977.6). Bela and T aman are full of fantasies, but the final result of each is only unhappiness. Shklovskij (1983.8) argues that Tatyana has greater internal sensitivity and attraction of spirit than Princess Mary, but that Mary has greater naturalness. Boris Eikhenbaum (1967.3) comments that of the five episodes of A Hero of Our Time, only one, “Princess Mary,” reveals the nature of its female characters, and Pechorin’s relationships with women. Pechorin’s confession reveals that he fell in love with all the women. All the female characters in A Hero Of Our Time helped to reflect Pechorin’s conception of them. Bela and Oundine are portrayed as more romantic female characters than Vera and Princess Mary. However, Princess Mary is thought to be, comparatively, a superior woman type who thinks and judges independently. At the same time, she is portrayed as a nice and honorable woman capable of deep sympathy (1958.4). Lermontov, to conclude this section, presents his female characters’ physical descriptions in a dramatic manner that gives a real sense of intimacy. A Hero Of Our Time consists, as is well known, of broad, complex constructions that describe the melodramatic love between Pechorin and various women, where the complexity and weaknesses of the female characters are in stark contrast to the enigma of Pechorin’s coldness and self-centered attitudes (1966.2). It seems that every female character in the novel has been influenced by Pechorin’s actions and attitudes. His features and behavior lead him to be cast out of society, and to have difficulty adapting to the emotional feelings he has for all the women with whom he has fallen in love (1982.3). 3. Nikolai Gogol As is often maintained in critical works, Gogol may be called a psychoanalytical symbolist. Although Gogol had keen and discriminating powers of observation, he did not record women exactly as he saw them, but refashioned them into much more significant and unusual creations. Strong-willed and independent-minded, they still remain real people. They live, however, for the most part, without hope. This is balanced by their Gogolian absurdity which, in a sense, affirms their lives through the evoccation of laughter. Leon Stilman (1952.4) suggests that Gogol often utilizes lovely, attractive, usually nameless, females as significant characters. At the same time, women are also portrayed as felons and witches who are difficult and complex to interpret Stilrnan further comments that Gogol’s female beauties represent witches and possess a type of slyness and devilry. Gogol’s female characters who are looking for marriage and love are often punished with mortification and death. Another Gogol expert, Richard Peace, (1981.7), thinks that in Vij, for instance, there is no major difference between the two main female characters, for the old woman and the young girl are one and the same person. Both of them dominate the male character, ultimately destroying him. This feature distinguishes them from Gogol’s other nameless but positive female characters. Their characterization is accomplished using enigmatic motifs and images, with the character of Homa representing the mystic powers of the female, and the male character fights with her as though she were inside him directing his sad fate. It is seen openly in two critics’ works (1989.4; 1994.5) that Gogol liked to provide many details regarding his female characters’ appearance instead of depicting their inner world. The witch’s appearance is a symbol of the window of the soul. One can directly observe her external characterization and thus be able to determine what she is feeling on the inside. Donald Fanger (1979.2) concludes that Gogol’s works appeal to readers as something intimate, because they deal with certain unchanging elements in the nature of women. Many of his female characters incite laughter because Gogol created them using a comic vision of existence in which the hardships of female characters cease to be intolerable since they are absurd. One critic regrets that Gogol did not depict women as he saw them in real life, but refashioned them into something much more unusual (1934.1). This is an important point, for it makes his female characters different than other Russian literary female characters. Women act from their own inner natures, but the wide range of these natures illustrates Gogol’s creativity and understanding of humanity. Erlich (1969.2) maintains that the devil often is an active character, causing the fantastic actions of the women to be carried out in a strange Gogolian manner. Gogol’s fantasy penetrates into peeple’s behavior, minds, speech, and everyday lives. The thing that makes him a unique author is that he saw his female characters as struggling with spiritual forces. Strakhovsky (1953.2) argues that Gogol’s female characters have a kind of unique romantic sensitivity, which causes their struggles with their own spirituality. In Gogol’s portrayals, women become so primitive and mysterious that their like may never be seen again in Russian literature. This “supematural quality” is reinforced by the impression that the women seem to be guided by an eminent sense of providence. In Dead Souls, the governor’s daughter (1956.2) has ideal feminine features and reveals herself in a manner different than the other female characters of the novel. The ladies in the town N. are inclined to violence and squabbling. They are portrayed as curious creatures, different from the governor’s daughter in that they have lost their feminity. These women, who behave in masculine ways, are characterized as abnormal and as not fitting the feminine norm (1978.7). Thus criticism ofien finds Gogol’s female characters to be weak and unprotected in society. There is little doubt that Gogol discusses every detail of their personalities, appearances, and surroundings in terms of masculine or feminine attributes. Some critics state that Gogol portrays all his female characters as colorful individuals who seem to be the ideal of all human types. In any case, all Gogol’s works are marked by rich emotion and comic and satirical narration, and these characteristics also affect his female characters. 4. Ivan Turgenev Turgenev created a broad spectrum of female characters. In some instances, Turgenev went back to the medieval portraits of long-suffering Russian women by emphasizing the theme of sacrifice in many of his female characters. Natalya in Rudin and Liza in A Nest of Gentle Folk exemplify this typical image. His other female characters are enticing beauties in complete control of themselves and those around them. Zinaida in First Love is an independent and strong woman who uses others for her own happiness. Elena, from On the Eve, exhibits both strengths and weaknesses. Women with traits of independence and idealism tempered by frustration appear in Asya, Torrents of Spring and Rudin. The mixture of strengths and weaknesses is also evident in the women of A Nest of Nobility and On the Eve. Moral values do play key roles in Turgenev’s female characters. Some of Turgenev’s female characters are colorful and enigmatic beauties, but fate drives all of them in a direction they cannot control. There is no way to escape it. Such a character is Zinaida in First Love (1983.4) who is fiercely independent and strong, and uses people for her own benefit. It seems that in the same manner as his heroes, Turgenev's female characters change in a way similar to George Sand’s major female characters. In On the Eve, Elena appears to have been created under the influence of George Sand, mixed with features of Pushkin’s Tatyana. Costlow finds Elena in On the Eve to be a new type of female character, which had not appeared from any writer’s pen previously. 0n the Eve is Elena and Insarov’s romantic love story told in regard to their feelings. Elena’s love could not be compared with anything in the world, so she leaves her country. In other words, she sacrifices herself. Her weakness was that she could not be objective. She was always in conflict with her own personality, and felt that her life was a burden. She encouraged herself to bear her responsibilities. Her moral and cultural values were not as important as her feelings for Insarov, and she felt that she would become more mature if she were abroad. She was a woman open to love, to being loved. This feeling of independence caused her to suffer a great deal emotionally, making her a lonely woman for the rest of her life. Nicholas Lee (1983.6) characterized the women in Smoke, Asya, The Torrents of Spring, and A Nest of the Gentry as being lonely, idealistic, and independent. Turgenev always utilized, as Lee maintains, female characters who dedicated themselves to idealism, love, adultery, tragedy, and reformist activity. In The Torrent of Spring and Smoke women are depicted as wild, love monsters, taking men in their clutches, and seducing them with their passionate feelings. In Turgenev’s fiction, female characters are much more determined than male characters (1985.6; 1989.7). Turgenev is considered one of the most skilled of Russian writers at depicting the image of the strong woman and her changing positions in Russian literature. A variation on this type is the “wild woman,” who is mature, beautiful, intelligent and sly, often coming up against the law. Elena’s mother openly remonstrates concerning how she had been cheated on by her husband and yet had no right to divorce him. Other examples are Varvara in A Nest of Gentlefolk, Princess R and Odincova in Fathers and Sons, Valentina in Virgin Soil, and Polozova in The Torrents of Spring (1957.4; 1964.6; 1973.3; 1983.6; 1993.4). These strong female characters are usually harmful to their partners. A counter image to this type is present in the female characters who had the nature of a child and were faithful and obedient to their men. Turgenev women like Liza in A Nest of Gentlefolk, Natalya in Rudin, and Asya in Asya are pure and obedient to the men they fall in love with and were highly regarded because of their loyalty. This appears to be a male conception of the ideal woman who has a naive, childish nature, and is, therefore, a faithful and sincere lover (1960.3). Markovich (1982.4), for example, focuses on Natalya in Rudin, noting that she possesses a quiet nature and is very sympathetic for readers. The appearance of Turgenev’s female characters was connected with their feelings, so they were more complex than those of Tolstoy’s (1925.1). Although all of them belonged to the same society and were of the same nationality, they had many differences in temperament and attitude. Although Turgenev’s female characters exhibit many progressive traits, a male conception of ideal ferrrinity still seems to dominate. 5. Leo Tolstoy Tolstoy also liked strong female characters, and saw women primarily in a socio- historical context. Tolstoy’s female characters often hear a fantastic quality; their lives are detemrined by their social status and the author’s social and religious views. For Tolstoy, the woman’s primary role in the family is that of wife and mother, and this determines her place in the larger society as well (1926.1). Thus, there is an overall sense of deterministic fate that overtakes Tolstoy’s women in works such as Anna Karenina, War and Peace, and The Kreutzer Sonata. Tolstoy, unlike Chekhov and Turgenev, downplayed his female characters’ sexuality, being firndamentally more conservative than his two contemporaries on the question of female emancipation. Overall, Tolstoy treats his female characters more as a skilled professional, a writer, while using his female portrayals for his philosophical views (1928.2). Tolstoy’s approach to women followed a fairly complex line. His novels Anna Karenina, War and Peace and The Kreutzer Sonata (1943.2; 1946.6; 1958.2), show most clearly how he viewed women. 10 The gender orientation of Anna Karenina is arguable indeed; one is not sure at the end of the book whether Tolstoy sides with Anna or is against her. Anna marries the bureaucrat Karenin and has a son, but the marriage soon becomes a nightmare. She is emotionally alone and starts to feel that she deserves a love that she does not receive from her husband, but can receive from Vronsky. She loves Vronsky with a pure and childish joy, hence her attitude and approach to him is somewhat naive and is filled with a sense of pride. She has an illegitimate baby girl from that affair and pays a painful price in society. Critics have noted that Tolstoy always felt strongly about having grown up without a mother’s love in his life. This makes him punish Anna who, in her marriage, does not stay faithful to her husband, and is, therefore, unable to become a good mother to her son. Thus, Tolstoy had to punish her according to the laws of the society in which he lived. Other parts 'of the novel, containing the love of Kitty and Levin, end in happiness, but the love of Anna and Vronsky ends in tragedy (1964.2), as it becomes a vehicle for Tolstoy’s thoughts on what an ideal marriage should be. In the beginning, Anna is a strong woman (1965.6). However, she comes to feel that the pressures of society are too heavy to bear, and realizes how much she has suffered for the sake of love. Even her personality has no value to her, and love has no meaning. She wants very much to have love, but this desire ends up making her life miserable rather than happy. She is a fallen woman and a victim of a tragedy (1967.1). By attempting suicide, she punishes Vronsky, society, and herself. Jackson (1968.1) approaches Anna from a different perspective. He believes that Anna fought against something she could not defeat. She rebelled by behaving contrary 11 to society’s values and was, therefore, branded immoral. But in comparison with other female characters in Tolstoy’s works, it seems that she had very different emotional behaviors and a nontraditional personality, which confronts the reader with an enigma. Anna’s suicide is somewhat of a mystery and leaves many questions and judgments unanswered. Though often discussed, the questions covering her death and the tragedy of her life still have not been answered. Questions such as, what was the main reason for her suicide, remain unsolved. Anna’s fate is not as harsh, however, as that of the main character in The Kreutzer Sonata who is murdered by her husband (1924.1). Tolstoy’s message, as I view it, is that the structure of society needs to be drastically changed. The real value and place of women should be established in both religion and society. Mandelker consistently declares that Tolstoy was an enemy of women and that his approach was based only on their sex and that marriage was an institution of prostitution, with women serving the key to its continuation (1993.2). Mandelker is convinced that women, as depicted in the nineteenth century-novel, are entrapped by a male dominated society in which the alternatives to marriage are basically limited to prostitution, so that no women could express themselves sexually except through adultery. A different critic maintains that Anna is a reflection of Tolstoy’s image of himself (1976.3). He judges society and its values through Anna’s sexuality. His love, hatred, and deep resentment for women are revealed. His approach to any woman and his understanding of her motherhood had been influenced by the loss of his own mother when he was a baby, resulting in difficulties in dealing with women, even in his own marriage (1945.5). His creation of women characters is the most evident example of how he approaches them. It is as though he were taking revenge upon them. 12 Anna Karenina and Tolstoy’s views of women helped society focus on women’s issues in the nineteenth century. Except for her tragic end, Anna is a symbol of liberty (1964.7). What distinguishes Tolstoy from Chekhov is his extreme conservatism towards women’s issues. Tolstoy did not want to emphasize women’s sexuality, only women’s roles in the family, marriage, and society (1967.8). He declared that women have a precious role in the family as wives and mothers, and, therefore, have an important job in maintaining a strong society (1946.3). Tolstoy emphasizes that chastity is an important value in the family, declaring his strict thoughts about marriage and family in The Kreutzer Sonata (1930.1). It is the story of a married woman who has an affair with a young man and is murdered by her jealous husband. The main character is also Tolstoy’s first male character who discusses and criticizes the role and position of women in society and marriage. Thus it can be seen that Tolstoy reveals his philosophy and attitudes through his female characters in War and Peace, Anna Karenina and The Kreutzer Sonata (1921.1). He depicts his various and different opinions about women’s sexuath much more as a scholar than an author. His novels serve as a means to explain his views of women’s roles in the farrrily, marriage, and society. 6. Fyodor Dostoevsky Some good examples of Dostoevsky’s views of female characters are seen in Crime and Punishment and The Idiot. Dostoevsky’s female characters hold deep cultural, religious, philosophical, and mystical beliefs. Dostoevsky’s women struggle, for the most part, with the temptations and rapaciousness of a social world that threatens their rich inner lives (1956.1). It is a well known fact that there has been much criticism leveled against Dostoevsky, maintaining that his female characters, in general, but in particular 13 Nastasya Filippovna in the Idiot, are not consistent or true to life. They have, however, stimulated much discussion of the depiction of women in nineteenth-century Russian literature. In Crime and Punishment, the pessimism, sadness, hopelessness, and weakness of women under male domination is one of the main topics (1971.8). Raskolnikov’s mother and his sister Dunia sell their moral values and freedom to make their beloved Raskolnikov happy, honored, and respected. If Sonia had not become a prostitute her family would have starved, and if Dunia and his mother had not sacrificed their lives by aggressively confronting a moral impasse in a self-sacrificing manner, Raskolnikov would probably not have felt guilty about them. Raskolnikov kills the consciousness within himself in the same way that his sister destroys her honor by selling herself to Luzzhin, and Sonia sells her body so that her family may survive. It is likely that Raskolnikov was made to confess because of a lack of communication with mankind, which led to intense isolation (1920.3). After committing his crime, Raskolnikov’s life became miserable, tormenting Sonia, Dunia, and his mother. It is only after his confession that his reintegration into society begins. Richard Curle (1950.2) finds Sonia passive, meek and submissive, and maintains that she is forced into prostitution by the terrible situation of her family. Raskolnikov sees Sonia as an ideal saintly female figure. Her function in the novel is to help Raskolnikov fight the deadlock that resulted from his own hubris as he confronted the society in which he lived. Sonia played a decisive role in convincing Raskolnikov to confess and change his ways, leading him to salvation. Although she is a contrast to Raskolnikov, this oppositeness reinforces their relationship. Sonia’s self-sacrificing and warm character 14 touches Raskolnikov deeply, and he has not felt these feelings for any woman before. A life of prostitution is the only course open to support her family, but it obviously did not fit her nature. The contrast and tension between her circumstances and her nature make her an exceptional Dostoevskian character, one close to his most intimate, religious beliefs, which view prostitution in the context of self-sacrifice and humility. Blackmur (1952.1) makes the point that Sonia’s strength and faith in Christianity helped her to deal with her unbearable, miserable, yet blessed life, and made her strong in her fight against her suffering as well. She represents Raskolnikov’s humanitarian side, and it is only this aspect of his personality that has potential to alleviate his sufferings. The story of Nastasya Filippovna’s life is a social protest. Not only in Russian literature, but also in world literature, few female characters have been glorified as much as Nastasya Filippovna with her femininity, charming expressions, and dazzling beauty. Nastasya F ilippovna is generally recognized by critics (1969.4; 1992.2) as a woman who demands much from herself. Two of her strongest traits are strength and passion. Yet, she can also be bashful and shy. As in other works of Dostoevsky, females of strong and passionate nature can destroy one another (1938.1) and often suffer tragic fates. Nastasya Filippovna is such an example in that she is lured to become a mistress through an offering of money. Prince Myskin fell in love with her as the woman for whom he had been waiting a very long time. She is a female character who breaks society’s chains and has a different type of life, philosophy, and manner than other women of her time. For this reason she receives Dostoevsky’s deep sympathy and admiration. Nastasya Filippovna does not become a ‘Holy Fool’ like Sonia and Dunia who have sacrificed themselves by submitting to their fate In contrast to Sonia, Nastasya Filipovna is a fallen 15 woman who is fighting for her tragic life (1992.2). Prince Myshkin, Totsky, and Rogozhin all wanted to use Nastasya F ilippovna’s beauty. None of them, however, recognized that her intelligence and confidence were greater attributes than her beauty. She was thus, unable to escape her fate as a fallen woman and as a victim of men. 7. Alexander Ostrovsky Katerina Vladikina (1959.6) interprets Katerina as a basic Russian female type whose manner of thinking in itself constituted a protest against the inhuman world around her, making her a victim of everyday life. Other critics (1974.5; 1981.4) feel that Ostrovsky had Katerina commit suicide as a protest against society. Peace (1989.8) claimed that she was typical of the lofty, fallen woman portrayed in many European literatures. Kaspin (1964.10) also calls Katerina a new type of female character, rooted in Russian reality and representing the selfless nature of Russian women. She is unique, complete, and strong. To him, Katerina is a folk character, truly national, and in addition to being a woman character of dramatic action, she bears the mark of strong creativity and grace in the face of diversity. 8. Anton Chekhov Chekhov’s approach to his female characters is entirely different from the others. Instead of using women as sounding boards for various philosophical or political views, or depicting them in terms of political struggle, Chekhov occupied himself with the everyday hopelessness and pointlessness of female characters’ lives. Chekhov never wrote about enthusiastic female characters who were actively engaged in political l6 movements. Instead, he often created weak, helpless female characters who needed their husband’s support both for finances and love. The basic theme of these works is that a woman’s primary job is to love her family and keep the home orderly (1980.1). Ronald Hingley maintains that Chekhov’s female characters complain about their aimless lives and their status as nonentities in Russian society (1950.3). Chekhov provides numerous examples demonstrating that the inequality between men and women not only stemmed from differences in gender, but was also socially motivated (1930.2; 1953.1; 1971.5). In his later short stories and plays, Chekhov, at times, seems sympathetic to his female characters. Those female characters are a symbol of idealism. Some critics interpret this as support for idealistic strong, active, and hard-working women (1946.1). A different critic writes that Chekhov used his own voice as his female characters’ voices, and transferred his personality into them (1955.1). Thus it can be seen that Chekhov’s female characters voice Chekhov’s own opinions about their lives in tragic- grotesque style. A few political and social statements can be found in Chekhov’s short stories and plays, as is demonstrated, for example, by Henry Popkin in “ Chekhov, the Ironic Spectator” (1952.3). Chukovsky (1967.2) paid attention to Chekhov’s humor, irony, and his optimistic orientation towards his female characters’ lives and personalities. His plays and short stories have been viewed as dramatic comedies about women’s lives and the traditions of Russian life (1969.5; 1970.3; 1972.2; 1974.1). Jerome Katsell, (1974.3) writes that Chekhov’s attitudes towards women changed gradually, becoming more sympathetic with time. Another insightful study is Edgard Broide’s Chekhov, Thinker and Artist: The 17 One-Hundredth Anniversary of the Beginning of His Career (1980.1). Broide states that the complex personalities of Chekhov’s female characters illuminate aspects of Chekhov’s attitudes towards women and societal changes. As to the behavior of Chekhov’s female characters, criticism generally has found that they are ironic (1921.2). Many critics have severely judged them as being too simple for their society and its values (1930.2; 1937.1; 1952.3; 1953.1; 1971.5). Other critics have drawn attention to Chekhov’s female characters as being humorous and sensitive women dealing with banal lives. By the end of the nineteenth century, Chekhov was considered to have reached literary maturity, writing masterful stories that revealed the different social backgrounds of his female characters. Carolina de Maegd Soép (1987.5) says that it is difficult to characterize Chekhov’s dominant female image. His female characters’ intelligence, philosophically oriented minds, and strong features make them alert to different events and people. Chukovsky (1967.2) says that Chekhov had a faithful and optimistic view of women, especially in his later short stories and plays, when he began writing about independent female characters who were self-supporting and had genuine comradeship with men. Those women dreamed of a much better life, of a new generation that would have strong moral values and the desire to create a good society. Almost half the critics take the position that Chekhov has more sympathy for his female characters in his later short stories and plays than in his early ones. Chekhov’s female characters often have great enthusiasm, but are trapped by their circumstances, e.g., Masha in The Three Sisters and Katya in A Boring Story. 18 9. Boris Pasternak. Many critics have insisted that Doctor Zhivago can be read as an independent artistic structure because of Lara. All the temptations that lure this symbol of purity begin with very ordinary, everyday events. She is flattered that a man of position should spend his time and money on her. Then come the torments of self-accusation, culminating in the realization that she has become a fallen woman. Bufford (1962.1) comments that Pasternak contrasts characteristics, inner values, and the actions of Lara and Doctor Zhivago as main characters. Lara becomes the symbol of life’s realities in contrast to Zhivago’s artistic idealism. Rowland (1967.9) approaches Lara’s characterization by saying that she is, as a personality, a kind of stream that flows and merges throughout the course of the novel as a symbol of idea and reality, suffering and joy. She struggles with basic human concerns such as life, and death, and with concepts such as evil and good. Some critics maintain that Lara’s moral behavior relates to her life experience, demonstrating that she sees life in her own unique way, a fact that contributes strongly to the novel’s progression, and to her finding the essence and pm'pose of her life (1962.3). Likhachev (1988.4) maintains that Lara becomes Pasternak’s rebellious and non-conformist female character. She is a symbol of hope for everyone, and despite her suffering maintains an inner strength, vitality and desire to live a full life. Unfortunately, she becomes a tragic figure, but she also remains, in a sense, an elusive figure. Critics maintain that Pasternak himself lived through the individual experiences that shaped Lara’s outlook towards life in the novel (1965.7). The symbolic depth of her character is recognized by those critics who draw a parallel between the kingdom of 19 plants and the kingdom of death, expressing a Romantic understanding of the mysteries of transformation and the mystical interplay between Lara and nature. Others argue that Lara represents Russian history. Still others stress that her characterization combines history and art, praising Pastemak’s language for its expressiveness. Studies also center on the various motifs of Lara’s characterization. Boris Thomas (1972.6) interprets Lara as being a panoramic picture of the novel, art, and Russian society. Other critics have referred to Doctor Zhivago as a political and social novel, which deals with the purity and nobility of the female soul (1968.5; 1970.7). Critics have recognized the symbolic history of Russian conscience in Pastemak’s novel, viewing it as historical and psychological at the same time. In the 1960's and 1970's, critical interest in Doctor Zhivago increased and critics often complimented Pasternak’s skill in creating a unique female character such as Lara. An example is Henry Gifford (1977.2), who states that Lara has a special psychological quality. Criticism has suggested that Pasternak bestowed upon Lara the belief that art always serves beauty, and that beauty is the joy of acquiring form, and form is the key to life. Pasternak also sees and underscores the fundamental difference between woman and man (1966.4). Cornell (1986.2) states that Lara, as well as her creator, have the highest regard for life because Doctor Zhivago is a most realistic human story: it tells about a woman and man who share an unconditional confidence in life. This viewpoint is supported by most critics who declare that undoubtedly there are aspects of Doctor Zhivago which bear some relation to myth; but the degree to which this should be taken into account will depend upon one’s sense of the novel’s coherence as a record of relations between women and men. Lara’s image constitutes a central part of the beauty 20 in Doctor Zhivago, an important component of Pasternak’s love for women in general (1977.2). Female Writers Kelly (1994.4) states in her A History of Russia Women ’s Writing that in pre- revolutionary Russia, women found it hard to break into the Russian literary arena partly due to male dominance, but also because of their own lack of education, political and economic rights, and the existence of many negative stereotypes concerning women’s experiences, intelligence, talent, and imagination. Eventually, however, they were successful in publishing their works in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. An important event for female characters in Russian criticism was the publication of Terrible Perfection (1987.4) by Barbara Heldt. Kelly (1994.4) makes the point that while Russian culture was highly resistant to the works of women writers, four women writers: Pavlova, Akhmatova, Tsvetaeva and Gippius, still managed to emerge at the forefront. 10. Karolina Pavlova Since Munir Sendich’s dissertation on Pavlova came out in 1968 Pavlova scholarship has grown into a large and voluminous body. Excellent research has been conducted in the USA, Britain, Russia and Germany. Introductory articles about Pavlova are no longer needed. Even symposia about her writing have been organized. As a result, Pavlova’s unique place in Russian poetry has been established. Most of the criticism of Pavlova concludes that her work still deserves more research. Barbara Heldt (1978.2) feels that Pavlova’s female characters have problems resulting from being a part of nineteenth-century Russian society, and that they work to resolve them. She also states that Pavlova expertly writes about her female characters’ 21 confusion when facing society’s restrictions. In her analysis of A Double Life, Heldt emphasizes Pavlova’s efforts to describe each character in the prose and poetry sections. 11. Anna Akhmatova Akhmatova has received greater attention from critics than Pavlova. One of her critics, Sandler (1990.6), reveals that most of her poems consist of fragments of female characters’ speech, for instance, conversations between the female character and her lover. Details of her female characters’ appearances are supplied, but they never speak their feelings; rather the reader must figure them out based on the descriptions of movements and gestures. Roberta Reeder’s study in Anna Akhmatova: Poet and Prophet (1994.6), noted that the qualities of Akhmatova’s female characters are attributed to them by other female characters and that they are not independent. They also do not have names. When they are speaking with female characters the conversation is clear, but male and female characters misunderstand and are in conflict with each other. Their words give the effect of tension, which gives rise to the crises that occur at the end of her poems. Another significant point is made by Jane Kenyon (1985.3) in her study of Akhmatova. She notes that the female characters focus almost always on themselves, but at the same time, in a strange way, they are also detached from themselves and can stand back as if observing themselves from the outside. It is the female characters’ detachment from the male characters that lies at the root of their detachment from themselves and thus allows Akhmatova to write as she does. Susan Amert (1992.1) writes about Akhmatova’s female characters’ attempts to make sense of their life experiences. They proceed through variations on the theme of unhappiness in love, investing each episode with new facets of meaning. Rosslyn (1984.3) in her book The Prince, the F 001 and the 22 Nunnery: The Religious Theme in the Early Poetry of Anna Akhmatova, says that her female characters have little control over how they end up. They need to love and be loved, which is a weakness or a kind of surrender of their will and feelings. Critics have noted that each of her female characters carries Akhmatova’s own experiences and interest in probing the psychology of love, although her life was not very similar to those of her female characters (1976.5). Critics have given their attention to Akhmatova’s poetics as well. It was noted by critics, that failed love affairs were a main topic in most of Akhmatova’s poems. There is often a kind of alienation in personal relationships and a failure in love concluding with a suicide, that is a reflection of Akhmatova’s psychology. In addition, her female characters seem to have less emotion than those of other authors. Lyn Coffin writes in Anna Akhmatova: Poems (1983.3) that Akhmatova’s paradoxical female characters’ hints, expressions, and gestures are a means of explaining their feelings, the course of events, and even the poet herself. Thomas (1979.6) notes that Akhmatova’s female characters possess two different natures, one side is extremely attractive, intimate, jolly and shrewd, while the other side is anxious, dreadful, but at the same time, innocent. Akhmatova has created many poetic images, but her image Musa became the most prominent. The image turned into Musa-female friend, the Musa-sister, the Musa- teacher and Musa-soother. The image changed through her writing career, eventually becoming the lyrical image of the author herself. 23 12. Marina Tsvetaeva Elaine Feinstein (1971.2) points out that Tsvetaeva’s female characters represent her own spiritual worldview. It is typical of her works that love, betrayal, magic, and poetry are all found in her female characters’ personalities. This combination of characteristics is especially evident in the many lyrics based on literary sources. It is not surprising to find that the collection alludes to many different fields of cultural references related to its female characters. Scholars note that her female characters can only hear or feel their love and their grief as far as Tsvetaeva could. They also make the interesting point that, for Tsvetaeva, her own gender view is always the least important thing. She does not even name her female characters, and gives equal importance to her male characters. Tsvetaeva is also full of despair regarding short-term love affairs between women and men, and her feeling is that both men and women are pitiful and mortal (1977.3; 1985.2, 1989.5). In some ways, Tsvetaeva is a feminist author painting a different picture of her time, culture, and folklore regarding female identity. The basic premise of her works is that the female identity should be depicted in a realistic fashion (1993.3). Another critic considers her a successful woman writer and poet who realizes the difference between an active-man and a rational-passive woman according to their changing roles in society. Tsvetaeva has a positive sense of understanding about feminity in her works (1996.1). Makin, in his book Marina Tsvetaeva: Poetics of Appropriation (1993.1), maintains that Tsvetaeva’s women present a different voice and a different view than the predominant one of the times. Typical is the association of sexual transgression with literary transgression. 24 13. Zinaida Gippius Zinaida Gippius is considered by Temira Pachmuss (1971.7) as successfully representing her female characters’ psychology by way of her major works, which reproduced traditional female-male roles and responsibilities in the early 1890's. It was also stated that Gippius incorporated both devils and angels in formulating the sexual and religious patterns that are the basis of her works. Vladimir Zlobin (1980.7) expresses the view that Gippius approaches her stories as a thinker, not solely as a woman, and consequently she possesses a male intellectualism that is the opposite of Akhmatova’s overwhelming femininity. The above survey shows that the history of female characters in Russian literature can be expressed in two ways; there is a great deal of similarity in how female characters have been portrayed by. prominent Russian authors, while at the same time each author discussed has portrayed Russian female characters in his/her own unique manner. These similarities include many traits, such as wives’ financial dependency on their husbands, dependency on their societal positions, lack of education, forcible domesticity, lack of freedom, unequal pay, unrecognized roles as family educator, mother and wife, denial of rights to publicly confess their religion, and many others. In addition to the above similarities, many female characters bear the traits of the authors who created them. This is found when the authors’ attitudes towards women is closely analyzed. Pushkin mostly portrayed women in a realistic social context and his attitude towards them is traditional, but positive as is seen in Tatyana’s characterization. Lermontov’s depiction of women is generally considered unusually complex, and individual. Dostoevsky’s attitude was also based on religious values, but when one 25 considers Gogol one finds many differences. Chief among them is that Gogol did not know women well. Chekhov is an enigma when it comes to analyzing his female characters. Chekhov’s attitude towards women drastically changed over time. The older Chekhov became, the less hostility he demonstrated towards his female characters. Turgenev also stands apart from other Russian authors, not only in that his female characters are more important to him than the male ones, but also that his female characters are extremely positive in their behavior and attitude. Similarly, Pastemak’s and Ostrovsky’s attitudes show great sympathy, if not love, for women. Even the name of Ostrovsky’s Katerina means pure, free of any vice. Pastemak’s Lara embodies the same virtues as Katerina and their treatment by their authors is notably pure. Of the four women authors this survey has discussed, Pavlova seems to occupy the most prominent place, although she has had the disadvantage of being exposed to criticism by males more than other female authors have been. Her attitude towards the female characters she created were as negative as towards her male characters. In contrast, Akhmatova’s female characters are highly positive when compared to her male characters. This can be said also for Gippius’s and Tsveateva’s female and male characters. This does not mean that female authors hate their male characters because of their gender, or that gender compels them to like or favor their female characters. Rather, women authors, as the above survey has shown and as demonstrated in the critical literature, understand women better than most male authors. 26 (CELAIEFFHRTFVVC) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF FEMALE CHARACTERS IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE (1920-1999) 1920 l. JAMESON, STORM. “Modern Drama in Europe.” London: W. Collins Sons, pp. 245-253. Argues that Chekhov’s female characters have a primary and matchless place in modern European drama. 2. MURRY, J. MIDDLETON. “Thoughts on Tchekov.” In Aspects of Literature. London: W. Collins & Sons, pp. 79-90. A general survey of Chekhov’s psychology, and sentimentality, and the views of his women characters in general. Women are portrayed as people in a period of change and decadence, but looking forward to a happy future. Chekhov respected his female characters. 1921 1. BLACK, ALEX. “The Truth about women: The Unrevealed Views of Tolstoy.” Harper’s M 143 (1921): 753-757. Discovers opinions of Tolstoy concerning women that were never 27 mentioned before. Discusses his complex philosophy and emotional state concerning critical issues with reference to many of his works. 2. FAGIN, N. BRYLLION. “Anton Chekhov: The Master of the Gray Short Story.” Poet Lore 32 (1921): 416-424. Comments on Chekhov’s short stories and plays and how they reveal his female characters’ monotonous daily lives, and their emptiness and despair in a humorous, ironic, and cynical tone. 3. GARNETT, EDWARD. “Tchehov and his Art.” Quarterly R 236 (1921): 257-269. Surveys Chekhov’s art based on traditional Russian women, which can be interpreted as having a humane and natural attitude towards the irony and humanity of women. 1922 1. BIRIUKOV, PAUL. Tolstoy ’s Love Letters, with a Study on the Autobiographical Elements in T olstoi ’s Work. Translated by S. Koteliansky and Virginia Wolf. London: Hogarth, 1922. Discusses his relationship with Tolstoy and the true-life sources of his female characters. Notes the autobiographical nature of Tolstoy’s female characters. 2. KAUN, ALEXANDER. “Turgenev Rerambled.” Bookman 55 (1922): 308-311. 28 Notes that Turgenev is very much a Westemer compared to his contemporary colleagues. Argues for Turgenev’s Harnletian woman type. 3. LYND, ROBERT. “The Alleged Hopelessness of Tchekov.” In Books and Authors. London: Richard Cobden-Sederson, pp. 233-239. Surveys Chekhov’s general female character types. 1923 1. DOLININ, A.S. “ Turgenev i Chekhov: Parallelnyi analiz ‘Svidaniia’ Turgeneva i ‘Egeria’ Chekhova” [Turgenev and Chekhov: Parallel analysis of Turgenev’s ‘ The meeting’ and Chekhov’s ‘Hunter’l. In T vorcheskii put’ Turgeneva: Sbornilt statei [Turgenev’s creative path: A collection of essays]. Petrograd: Seiatel’, pp. 277-318. Describes Chekhov’s attitude towards his female characters. 2. GERHARDIE, WILLIAM A. “Anton Chekhov: A Critical Study.” London: Richard Cobden-Sanderson, 1923. Discusses Chekhov’s success in capturing the aimless, ordinary lives of his female characters. 3. SELIVANOVA, NINA NIKOLAEVNA. Russia ’s Women. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1923. Focuses on a simple life and develops an understandable concept of the historical development and fate of Russian women. Presents Russian women’s struggles for freedom, equal rights, and independence as historic processes. 29 1924 1. MAUDE, AYLMER. The Kreutzer Sonata and Other Stories. Translated by Louise Maude and Aylmer Maude. London: Oxford, 1924. A discussion of the concepts of marriage and sexual jealousy in The Kreutzer Sonata. Emphasizes that the main female character of the story does not share Tolstoy’s views of the nature of morality and family values. 2. MURRY, MIDDLETON. “Anton Chekhov” In Discoveries: Essays in Literary Criticism. London: W. Collins & Sons, pp. 81-101. Focuses on women’s sensibility described as a feeling compounded by introspective lyricism. Shows that Chekhov succeeds in capturing the reality of women’s lives. Concludes that his attitude towards women is one of emotional restraint and irony tinged with melancholy. 3. PHELPS, W.L. Introduction to the Plays of Ivan S. T urgenev. Translated by M.S. Mandell. New York: Macmillan Company, 1924. Describes Turgenev’s plays with emphasis on his female characters. Colored in elegiac and lyric tones, the women’s lives cause the reader to think about them seriously. 4. WIENER, LEO. The Contemporary Drama of Russia. Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1924. Explores contemporary Russian drama, concentrating on prominent female characters. 30 1925 1. STRAKHOV, NIKOLAI. Kriticheskie stat ’i ob I. S. T urgeneve iLN. T olstom [Critical articles about Turgenev and LN. Tolstoy]. Moscow: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1925. Claims that Tolstoy’s female characters are similar to Tolstoy’s presentation of goodness and truthfulness. 2. WERTH, ALEXANDER. “Anton Chekhov.” SEER 3 (1925): 622-641. A description of Chekhov’s manner of defining women’s progress in society. 1926 l. HOWARD, SIDNEY. “My Favorite Fiction Character Natasha Rostova in Tolstoy’s War and Peace.” Bookman 62 (1926): 670-671. Argues that Natasha’s personality is very positive. Natasha exhibits simplicity and is an exquisite feminine character rarely found in other Russian works. 2. LAVRIN, JANKO. Gogol. London: George Routledge & Sons Ltd., 1926. Gives a perfunctory interpretation of Gogol’s views of women; concentrates on works, such as Vij, and on some of Gogol’s unique female characters, e.g., the prostitute from Gogol’s Petersburg stories. 31 3. YARMOLINSKY, AVRAHM. T urgenev: The Man-His Art-and His Age. New York: Century Co., 1926. Links details of Turgenev’s biography with his female characters. 1927 l. BALUKHATYI, S. D. “Etiudy po istorii teksta i kornpozicii Chekhovskikh p’es.”[Studies in the history of the text and composition of Chekhov’s plays]. Poetika: Sbornik statei [Poeticsz A collection of articles]. Vol. Leningrad: Akademiia nauk, pp.138-154. Summarizes the importance of each of Chekhov’s dramatic works and their female characters. 2. FORSTER, EDWARD M. “The Story.” In Aspects of the Novel. New York: Harcourt, Brace, pp. 63-64. Believes that the abundance of female characters in War and Peace is due to its historical, epic and sociological qualities. 1928 l. SHKLOVSKY, VICTOR. Material istil’ v romane L. T olstogo. [Material and style in the novel of L.Tolstoy]. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, pp. 86-108. Elaborates On Tolstoy’s views about women as inhuman creatures. 2. SIMPSON, LUCIE. “Tolstoy’s Heroines.” Fortn R 124 (1928): 474-497. Discusses Tolstoy’s main female characters, Anna in Anna 32 Karenina and Natasha in War and Peace. Focuses on a wide range of critical opinions about both women’s lives and various aspects of their characterization. Concludes that both women are identified as focused on love. 3. PETROV, BASIL B. “About Women.” Rus Stud 5 no.1 (1928): 23-26. Studies Tolstoy’s concept of women and his approach towards them. Concludes that Tolstoy exemplifies his main female characters in his masterpieces. 1929 l. CARR, E. H. “Turgenev and Dostoevsky.” SEER 8 (1929): 156-163. A comprehensive study of the relationship between Turgenev and Dostoevsky. Maintains that there is a huge gap between the two authors in that they have different opinions concerning women, Russia, and God. 1930 l. INGERSOLL, ROBERT G. “Tolstoy and The Kreutzer Sonata.” In Essays in Criticism New York: Farrell, pp. 64-77. Argues that Tolstoy’s thoughts about women are inhuman. Believes that readers have a warm sympathy towards the female characters, but not the male character who is mean and cruel to his wife in The Kreutzer Sonata. 33 2. SOBOLEV, Iu.V. Chekhov: Stat’i, materialy, bibliografiia. [Chekhov: Articles, materials, bibliography]. Moscow: Federatsiia, pp. 347-351. Insists that it was Chekhov’s hope that future Russian women’s lives would be improved, both in the home and in society. Further states that the female characters expose their weaknesses as well as those of the society they live in. Concludes that many of Chekhov’s female characters freely express their own feelings about their life and society, and are confused by the reality of Russian life. 1931 l. YARMOLINSKY, AVRAHM. “Tolstoy’s War and Anna Karenina.” In Russian Literature. Chicago: American Library Association, pp. 31-38. Notes that Anna Karenina is regarded by Russian literary criticism as one of its most favorite female characters. Believes that she is one of the female characters that served to introduce the ethical aspects of Russian life into Russian literature. 1932 l. HARSHKOWICZ, HARRY. Democratic Ideas in T urgenev ’s Works. New York: Columbia University Press, 1932. Equates the democratic ideas of Turgenev’s works with those of the Russian intellectual classes. Argues that Turgenev’s female characters are usually noble types. 34 2. PATRICK, GEORGE Z. “Chekhov’s Attitude Towards Life.” SEER 10 (1932): 658—668. Argues that most of Chekhov’s female characters reflect and share his opinions about the banality of everyday life-«particularly when confronted by male characters. 1934 1. BRASOL, BORIS. The Mighty Three: Poushkin, Gogol, Dostoievsky; A Critical Trilogy. New York: William Farquhor Payson, 1934. Gives a detailed bibliographical account of three Russian writers discussing their moral, philosophical, and psychological credos in connection with their female characters. 2. WOOLF, VIRGINIA. “The Novels of Turgenev.” Yale R 23, no. 2 (1934): 276-283. Focuses on Turgenev’s art with an emphasis on his female characters which are taken to be a reflection of his soul. Notes that Turgenev’s works are extraordinary because they reveal his feelings and philosophy. 1935 1. BALUKHATYI, S.D. Dramaturgiia Chekhova: K postanovke p ’esy ‘Vislrneryi sad’ v Kharkovskom T eatre Russkoi Dramy [Chekhov’s drama: On the staging of ‘The Cherry Orchard’ in the Kharkov Theater of Russian Drama]. Kharkov: Teatr Russkoi Dramy, pp. 208-210. 35 Lists some theater and staging features of Chekhov's last plays focusing on the staging of The Cherry Orchard. 1936 1. BALUKHATYI, S.D. Chekhov-dramaturg [Chekhov the dramatist]. Leningrad: Khudozhestvannaia literatura, pp. 321-323. Examines in detail Chekhov’s major female characters, and argues that the personal drama of each female character is based on the social values of nineteenth- century Russian society. 1937 l. TOUMANOVA, NINA ANDRONIKOVA. Anton Chekhov: The Voice of Twilight Russia. London: Jonathan Cape, 1937. A critical and biographical study revealing clear depictions of female characters. Argues that Chekhov breaks down the social values and demands of his female characters in the context of the story. 1938 1. REM, ALFRED LIUDVIGOVICH. Dostoevskii psikhoanaliticheskie etiudy. Moscow: Praga, 1938. Once a pioneer in the interpretation of Dostoevsky’s and Turgenev’s female characters. His book is now outdated in terms of psychoanalytic theory. 36 1940 1. CLARK, BARRETT H. “Anton Chekhov.” In A Study of the Modern Drama. New York: Appleton-Century, pp.56-62. Claims that female characters in Chekhov’s The Seagull stand apart from the female characters in Chekhov’s three other major plays. Compares the younger generation of female characters with other female characters and maintains that Chekhov preferred them to middle-aged and older characters. 2. DATALLER, ROGER. “The Historical Novel.” In The Plain Man and the Novel. London: Nelson, pp. 47-62. Rejects the accepted Russian critics’ opinions about female characters’ and spirituality. 1941 l. BATES, H.E. “Tchehov and Maupassant.” In The Modern Short Story: A Critical Survey. Boston: The Writer, pp.72-94. Surveys Chekhov’s and Maupassant’s female characters, finding differences and similarities between them. Concludes that Chekhov’s attitude towards female characters is similar to that of a doctor, while Maupassant’s is similar to a lawyer's. 1942 l. CAIRNS, HUNTINGTON. “Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace.” In Invitation to Learning. New York: New Home Library, pp. 154-166. 37 Gives a thorough analysis of War and Peace and its female characters, Natasha in particular, and strongly criticizes negative characters, such as Helen. 2. LAVRIN, JANKO. “ The Chekhov Period.” In An Introduction to the Russian Novel. London: Methuen, pp. 126-135. Examines Chekhov’s short stories, and explains the conflict between female characters. Points out the differences between female characters, their society, and other views. 1943 l. BLACKMUR, RICHARD. “Crime and Punishment.” The Chimera l (1943): 7- 28. Explains the meaning of Crime and Punishment in reference to its female characters Claims that the idea of the primitive Christian refers mostly to the female characters being punished for their ‘crimes.’ In addition to Sonia’s characterization within these terms, it presents Sonia and Dunia as impulsive, decent and simple women. 2. BOWRA, C. M. A Book of Russian Verse. London: Macmillan & Co. Ltd., 1943. Mentions, and, in some cases, thoroughly analyzes the classical female characters of Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol, Turgenev, Tolstoy, and Chekhov. 38 3. PUSHKIN, ALEXANDER SERGEEVICH. Evgeny Onegin: A Novel In Verse. Translated by Babette Deutsch. New York: The Heritage Press, 1943. Explains why the female characters of Evgeny Onegin are so complex. Details protagonists’ characteristics, particularly Evgeny’s love for Tatyana. 4. SIMMONS, ERNEST J. “The Writing of War and Peace.” In Slavic Studies. Freeport, N.Y.: Books for Libraries Press, 1943. Claims that the female characters in Tolstoy’s War and Peace experience love, happiness and the exaltation of family life. 1945 1. ANNAN, NOEL. “Novelist-Philosophers: Turgenev.” Horizon 11 (1945): 152- 163. Attempts to demonstrate the melancholy tone characteristic of Turgenev’s female characters; explains their view of life, society, and their destiny. Identifies some similarities between Turgenev’s and Dostoevsky’s approach towards women. 2. BROOKS, CLEANTH AND HEILMAN, ROBERT B. “Notes on the Seagull.” In Understanding Drama: Twelve Plays. New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston, pp.490-502. Shows that Chekhov’s female characters are neither tragic nor comic. Concludes that there is an aesthetic distance between Chekhov’s female characters in The Seagull. 39 3. CHUKOVSKY, KORNEI. Chekhov the Man. Translated by Pauline Rose. New York: Hutchinson & Company Ltd., 1945. An overview of Chekhov’s depiction of his female characters. Emphasizes that Chekhov’s short stories show the struggle of female characters and their lack of power. Chekhov is influenced by his time and society, which shaped his main creative ideas about female characters. 4. MORGAN, CHARLES. “Tolstoy: War and Peace.” In Reflections in a Mirror. New York: Macmillan, pp.201-216. Discusses the relationships between the male and female characters in War and Peace. 5. POLNER, TIKHON. Tolstoy and His Wife. Translated by Nicholas Wreden. New York: Norton, 1945. Points to several incidents of family quarrels between Tolstoy and his wife and indicates how difficult Tolstoy’s life was during the last years of his life, including his flight from home during the last three days of his life. 6. SCHAKHOWSKOI, ZINAIDA. “War and Peace: Literary Appreciation.” Message 2 (1945): 53-55. Analyzes the nature of the novel’s treatment of ambition, fantasy, love, and power. Also examines moral understanding and fatalism as exemplified by the individual female characters of War and Peace. 40 1946 1. ERMILOV, V. Chekhov: Zhizn ’ zamechatel’nykh liudei [Chekhov: The lives of remarkable people]. Moscow: Molodaia gvardiia, pp.444-446. Tries to convince the reader of Chekhov’s enormous respect and love for Russian women. Gives examples, albeit few, of Chekhov’s positive interpretation of female characters. 2. FARRELL, JAMES T. “An Introduction to Anna Karenina.” In Literature and Morality. New York: Vanguard, pp. 296-304. Suggests that Anna is portrayed as a negative female character. Mentions a new female type in Russian literature. 3. . “History and War in Tolstoy’s War and Peace.” In Literature and Morality. New York: Vanguard, pp. 214-230. Stresses Tolstoy’s strict religious beliefs about women and their role as wife, mother, and member of society. 4. LAVRIN, JANKO. A First Series of Representative Russian Stories: Pushkin to Gorky. London: Westhouse, 1946. Draws a parallel between two stories that have similar female characters and compares their similarities. 5. SERGIEVSKY, NICHOLAS N. “The Tragedy of a Great Love: Turgenev and Pauline Viardot.” ASEER 5 (1946): 55-71. 41 A detailed analysis of the love between Turgenev and Pauline Viardot. Maintains that Turgenev’s love for her affected him greatly and the female types he creates in his works are an indication of that. 6. SIMMONS, J. ERNEST. “Tolstoy: An Approach.” Sat R Lit 29 (1946): 56-58. Discusses the complex personalities of Tolstoy’s female characters, stressing their inner conflicts. Mentions the duality of the female characters’ personalities and Tolstoy’s attitude towards women. 1947 I. LAVRIN, JANKO. An Introduction to the Russian Novel. New York: Whittlesey House, 1947. A commentary on society and its historical and social-economic background. Emphasizes the role of women. In addition, the values of female characters in Russian literature are discussed. 2. WHITE, ANDREW D. “Walks and Talks with Tolstoi.” In Discovery of Europe: The Story of an American Experience in the Old World. Edited by Philip Rahv. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, pp. 359-383. Summarizes Tolstoy’s views of women and comments on these views collected in his numerous conversations with Tolstoy. 3. YARMOLINSKY, AVRAHM. Introduction to the Portable Chekhov. New York: Viking Press, pp.1-27. Insists that Chekhov’s female characters enrich his stories and plays, giving them a lyrical quality, strong idealism and sense of freedom. The women 42 in these plays and stories are the sole repositories of culture. 1948 l. ERMILOV, V.V. Dramaturgiia Chekhova [Chekhov’s Drama]. Moscow: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1948. Surveys Chekhov’s Uncle Vanya, Ivanov, The Cherry Orchard and The Seagull. Emphasizes that Chekhov’s female characters express his thoughts about life in both comic and tragic manners. 2. KUZMINSKAYA, TATYANA A. Tolstoy as I Knew Him; My Life at Home and at Yasnaya Polyana. Translated by Nora Sigersit et al., introduction by Ernest J. Simmons. New York: Macmillan, 1948. Gives comprehensive biographical information about characters in War and Peace, such as Natasha and other female characters. 3. LAVRIN, JANKO. From Pushkin to Mayakovsky. London: Sylvan Press, 1948. Attempts to define Pushkin’s and Mayakovsky’s roles in their descriptions of female characters. Intended as an introduction to our understanding of the psychological roles of female characters in Pushkin’s, Gogol’s, Turgenev’s, Dostoevsky’s and Chekhov’s works. 4. SCHEPKINA-KUPERNIK, T.L. “O.L. “O. L. Knipper-Chekhova v roliakh p’es A.P. Chekhova.” [Olga Knipper-Chekhova and her roles in Chekhov’s plays]. In Ezhegodnik Moskovskogo Khudozhestvennogo Teatra. Moscow: Iskusstvo, pp. 317-337. Gives a broad biography of Chekhov’s wife Olga Knipper. Explains 43 Olga’s role as Arkadievna in The Seagull, Masha in The Three Sisters, and Ranevskaia in The Cherry Orchard. Mentions that Chekhov was influenced largely by his wife. Introduces a new type of female character in Russian literature. 1949 1. BOWRA, SIR MAURICE. “Boris Pasternak.” In The Creative Experimnt. London: Macmillan, pp. 128-158. Argues that his technique and vision are confined both to love and the female characters. Adds that Pasternak’s thoughts, opinions and sense of fate are reflected in his female characters. 2 FERGUSSON, FRANCIS. “Ghosts and The Cherry Orchard: The Theater of Modern Realism.” In The Idea of a Theater: A Study of Ten Plays. The Art of Modern Drama in Changing Perspective. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp.146-l77. Surveys Chekhov’s female characters, who are driven by dramatic art and linked to modern realism. Concludes that Chekhov showed their life in a new and colorful form. 3. WEIDLE, VLADIMIR. Pushkin. Translated by David Scott. Paris: UNESCO, 1949. Discusses the many features of Pushkin’s female characters and elaborates on Pushkin’s thoughts about Tatyana. Emphasizes that Pushkin’s approach to Tatyana follows the main tradition of Russian literature. Tatyana is a positive female character. 1950 1. BERDNIKOV, G.P. Anton Pavlovich Chekhov: Russkie Dramaturgi, Nauchno- Populiarnye Ocherki [Anton Pavlovich Chehkhov: Russian dramatists, scholarly-popular sketches]. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1950. Examines four major Chekhov plays that give insight into his female characters and their lives in the context of his literary development. 2 CURLE, RICHARD. Characters of Dostoevsky: Studies from Four Novels. London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1950. Analyzes six of Dostoevsky’s female characters: Sonya, Katerina Ivanovna, Pulcheria Alexandrovna, Nastasya Filippovna, Madame Epanchin, and Aglaia. Gives an in-depth analysis of Dostoevsky’s psychological perspectives that can be found in his female characters. 3. ERMILOV, V. Fyodor Dostoevsky. Translated by J. Katzer. Moscow: Foreign Language Publishing House, l95_. Elaborates widely upon Dostoevsky’s dualism and polarism. Dostoevsky dislikes the circumstances of life that have changed his female characters and affected them so much. 4. HINGLEY, RONALD. Chekhov: A Biographical and Critical Study. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1950. Some of his comments should be updated within literary criticism, here and in Russia. Argues that Chekhov’s works gave a detailed and accurate picture of Russian women. 45 S. MORGAN, CHARLES. “Turgenev’s Treatment of a love-story.” Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature of the United Kingdom 25 (1950): 102-119. Argues Turgenev’s creativity in First Love balances the depiction of the main female character Zinaida. Argues in favor of Turgenev’s opinion about passionate love, thus forcing Zinaida to change from devil to angel. Claims that Turgenev is the most talented author in his description of female characters. Adds uniqueness and elegance as special features of the novel. 6. WILSON, EDMUND. “The Original of Tolstoy’s Natasha.” In Classics and Commercials: A Literary Chronicle of the Forties. New York: Farrar, Straus, pp. 442-452. Implies that Tolstoy used his sister-in-law, Tatyana Kuzminskaya, as a model for Natasha in War and Peace. 1951 1. LAVRIN, JANKO. Nikolai Gogol: A Centenary Survey. London: Sylvan Press Ltd., 1951. Emphasizes the puzzling transitions of Gogol’s female characters between the Realist and Romantic periods. Everything about his female characters is misleading or mysterious. 2 O'FAOLAIN, SEAN. “Anton Chekhov or the Persistent Moralist.” In The Short Story. New York: Devin-Adair, pp. 76-105. Generally agrees with criticism’s concepts concerning Chekhov’s views of female characters. Notes Chekhov’s constant moralizing. 46 1952 l. BLACKMUR, RICHARD. “Crime and Punishment: A Study of Dostoevsky.” In Essays in Modern Literary Criticism. Edited by Ray West. New York: Scribner, pp. 472-489. Discusses the two main female characters in Crime and Punishment. Treats Sonia’s role of both holy person and prostitute. Emphasizes the importance of Sonia in both the preparation and execution of Raskolnikov’s religious redemption. 2 IV AN OV, VYACHESLAV. Freedom and the Tragic Life: A Study in Dostoevsky. Translated by Sir Maurice Bowra. London: Harvill Press, 1952. A thematic study of Dostoevsky which reveals his insights into the world and his passionate devotion to the spiritual life. 3. POPKIN, HENRY. “Chekhov, the Ironic Spectator.” Theatre Arts 3 (1952): 17-80. Analyzes the irony and comedy present in Chekhov’s female characters. Says that Chekhov’s female characters served as a means of expressing his political Opinions. 4. STILMAN, LEON. “Gogol’s Overcoat: Thematic Pattern and Origins.” ASEER 11 (1952): 138-148. Discusses a dream in which Gogol sees his wife changing into a prostitute. The dream serves as an illusion. Tries to convince the reader that Gogol wanted to create such a female character. Claims that Gogol’s women are passionate, but short-lived people, for they die when such illusions are dispelled. Concludes that Gogol’s nameless female characters are meaningful and a form of genuine art on 47 their own terms. 1953 1. NIEISTER, CHARLES W. “Chekhov’s Reception in England and America.” SlavR 12(1953): 109-121. Presents English and American critical viewpoints about Chekhov’s female characters. They are described by both traditions as very significant elements in Chekhov’s works. 2 STRAKHOVSKY, LEONID I. “The Historianism of Gogol.” ASEER 12 (1953): 360-371. Portrays Gogol’s main female characters as precise conceptions of a historical perspective. Claims that Gogol unites all of his female characters in a descriptive panorama. 1954 l. BIALYI, G. A. “Dramaticheskoe Masterstvo Chekhova.” [Chekhov’s craftsmanship in the drama]. Theater 7 (1954): 41-51. Comments on Chekhov’s female characters' unpredictable characterizations. Adds that The Cherry Orchard, with all of its female characters, represents a new period in Chekhov’s dramatic works. 2 BRODIANSKY, NINA. “Turgenev’s Short Stories: A Re-evaluation.” SEER 32 (1954): 70-92. Examines Turgenev’s works dealing with the characterization of his female characters. 48 3 COLLINS, H.P. “Chekhov: The Lost Phase.” Contemp R 186 (1954): 37-41. Argues that Chekhov exposes the flaws that women have inherited in Russian society. Maintains that Chekhov felt that happiness could be achieved through the progressof humanity. 4. HUDSON, LYNTON. “The Loose-and Drama and the Elusiveness of Life.” In Life and the Theatre. New York: Roy, pp. 16-33. Argues that Chekhov created new female characters in Russian literature. He brought a new approach, transferring unspoken thoughts into outspoken characters. 6. MAGARSHACK, DAVID. T urgenev: A Life. London: Faber and Faber Ltd., 1954. Briefly touches on Turgenev’s female character Zinaida and her love for a thirteen -year-old boy. Compares Zinaida’s love for the boy with her love for his father. Mentions that this love story can be attributed to Pauline Viardot. Presents a whole new gallery of female types different from those of traditional Russian society. 1955 1. ALDANOV, MARK. “Reflections on Chekhov.” Translated by Ida Estrin. Rus R 14 (1955): 83-92. Argues about the contradictory traits found in Chekhov’s female characters. Elaborates on how his personality was transferred to his female characters. 49 2 CHEKHOV, ANTON PAVLOVICH. A. P. Chekhov 0 literature. [Chekhov on ' literature]. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1955. Contains Chekhov’s letters from 1879 to 1904, in which he wrote his Opinions on literature and contemporary thought. His letters reveal his moral and humanistic honesty towards women. 3. FADIMAN, CLIFTON. “War and Peace” In Party of One: The Selected Writings of Clifton Fadiman. New York: World Publishing Co., pp. 176-202. Maintains that War and Peace is an extraordinary novel in which Tolstoy skillfully places the contrasts between good and evil, love and hate, and life and death, in the center of his female characters' personalities. 4. TRILLING, LIONEL. “Anna Karenina.” In The Opposing Self: Nine Essays in Criticism. London: Seeker & Warburg, pp. 66-75. Responds to the most essential question of the novel, i.e., whether Anna is to be blamed for her sins, or whether one should forgive her for them. Gives his own interpretation of Tolstoy’s “inability” to provide the reader with his views of Anna’s guilt. 5. ZONOVA, D. “ ‘Geroi Nashego Vremeni’ Sochinenie M.Lermontova.” [A Work of M. Lermontov ‘A Hero of Our Time’]. In M. Yu. Lermontov: Vrusskoy kritike [In M.Yu. Lermontov: In Russian Criticism]. Moskva: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo khudozhestvennoi literatury, pp. 212-214. Presents a realistic portrait of a contemporary female type in A Hero of Our Time. Suggests that female character analysis should be organized differently. Pays special attention to Princess Mary. 50 1956 l. BLACKMUR, RICHARD. “A Rage of Goodness: The Idiot of Dostoevsky. In The Critical Performance. Edited by Stanley Edgar Hyman. New York: Harcourt, pp. 235-242. Details are given of a scene revealing the inner world of Dostoevsky’s major female characters, which give the novel traditional and cultural significance by having the main female characters embody different perspectives. 2. WEATHERS, WINSTON. “Gogol’s Dead Souls: The Degrees of Reality.” Col Engl 17 (1956): 159-164. Finds that the governor’s daughter is depicted using the epic tradition. Notes her spiritual beauty in addition to physical beauty. 3. WINNER, THOMAS G. “Chekhov’s Seagull and Shakespeare’s Hamlet: A Study of Dramatic Device.” Slav R 15 (1956): 103-1 11. Examines the Harnletian elements of Chekhov’s female characters in The Seagull. Maintains that these Harnletian elements create a lyrical mood in the story’s female characters. 1957 1. BERDNIKOV, G.P. Chekhov-dramaturg: T raditsii i novotorstvo v dramaturgii Chekhova. [Chekhov-the dramatist: Tradition and innovation in Chekhov’s drama]. Leningrad: Iskusstvo, pp. 246-253. Examines the female characters of The Cherry Orchard, and determines that they are more liberal than other female characters in Chekhov’s previous works. They are mostly in conflict with their everyday life. 51 2. FADIMAN, CLIFTON. “ War and Peace Fifteen Years After.” In Any Number Can Play. New York: World Publishing Co., pp. 361-370. Surveys the novel’s historical female characters. Additionally, examines Tolstoy’s opinions about war and history, and their effects on his female characters, along with Tolstoy’s treatment of them. 3. LONDON, GEORGE. “Evgeny Onegin and the Romantic Ideal.” Theatre Arts 4 (1957): 79-80. Notes that the female characters in Pushkin’s Evgeny Onegin take their central position from their Romantic and fantastic natures. They act out their natures. 4. MATLAW, RALPH E. “Turgenev’s Art in ‘Spring Torrents’.” SEER 35 (1957): 157-172. Discusses the similarities and differences of the main female characters in Spring Torrents and Smoke. Shows the differences in the female characters who come from a variety of social classes. 5. STERN, J. P. “Effi Briest, Madame Bovary and Anna Karenina.” Mod Lang R 52 (1957): 363-375. Analyzes three famous female characters in relation to their social I enviromnent. Concludes that Anna is more honest with her husband and her society than the other two adulteresses. 1958 1. BORDINAT, PHILIP. “Dramatic Structure in Chekhov’s Uncle Vanya.” SEE] 16 (1958): 195-210. 52 A general survey of Uncle Vanya along with its dramatic female characters. The women in Uncle Vanya dream of enjoying happiness and an ideal life someday in the future, but they are misled. 2. GORKII, MAXIM. “Lev Tolstoi.” In Literary Portraits. Moscow: Language Publishing House, pp. 9-102. Discusses Tolstoy’s thoughts on religion, romanticism, science, and a variety of female types. 3. MICEK, EDUARD. The Real Tolstoy. Austin, Texas: Czech Literary Society, 1958. A general survey of some of the female characters from Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina and War and Peace. Identifies some of the familial similarities between Tolstoy and Natasha, e.g., religious beliefs, views of life and family values. 4. NABOKOV, VLADIMIR. A Hero of Our Time. New York: Doubleday Anchor, 1958. A general commentary on A Hero of Our Time that identifies the lyrical beauty and ironic wit of Lermontov’s female characters and reveals the importance of the female characters in the novel. 5. POPOVKIN, ALEKSANDR IVAN OVICH. Lev Nikolaevich T olstoi: Biograflia. [Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy: Biography]. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe Uchebno- Pedagogicheskoe Izdatel’stvo, 1958. Not only a detailed study of Tolstoy’s biography, language and methods, but also an analysis of his famous female characters in War and Peace and Anna Karenina. His religious attitudes and views towards women are discussed. 53 1959 1. DERMAN, AB. 0 Masterstve Chekhova. [On Chekhov’s Craftsmanship]. Moscow: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1959. A deep analysis of Chekhov’s new approach towards his female characters. Tries to stimulate the reader into further examination of other female characters. 2. ERLICH, VICTOR. “The Concept of the Poet in Pasternak. ” SEER 37 (1959): 325-335. A detailed analysis of Pasternak as a poet. Cites numerous examples of Pastemak’s esteem and love of Russian women. Notes Pastemak’s infatuation with many women, citing his poem “Ia tozhe ljubil.” 3. GRIGORIEFF, DIMITRY FELIX. “Pasternak and Dostoevskii.” SEEJ 17 (1959): 335-342. Believes that Dostoevsky’s conception of holy beauty has influenced Pastemak’s views of Lara, Tanya, and others. 4. HARE, RICHARD. “Tolstoy after War and Peace.” In Portraits of Russian Personalities between Reform and Revolution. London: Oxford University Press, pp. 196-244. A detailed examination of the life of Anna through her relationship with Vronsky. Looks at Tolstoy’s moral judgments of Anna. 5. KELSON, JOHN. “Allegory and Myth in Cherry Orchard.” Western Hum R 13 (1959): 321-324. Surveys the form and function of Chekhov’s allegorical and mythical humor. Adds that each of his female characters represent an element of Russian 54 society with its many cultural features. 6. VLADYKINA, I. G., editor. A.N. Ostrovsky: Sobranie Sochinenii. [A.N. Ostrovsky: Collected Works]. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe Izdatel’stvo, 1959. Analyzes Ostrovsky’s Katerina. Points out Katerina’s domesticity and her innate native Russian features. 1960 1. CANNAC, EVGENIJ. “Rannie Povesti Chekhova.” [Chekhov’s early tales]. In Anton Chekhov: Some Essays (1880-1960). Edited by Thomas Eekman. Leiden: E. J. Brill, pp. 355-35. Briefly surveys Western cultural influences on Chekhov’s female characters, but sees them as remaining rooted in their Russian identity. 2. COOK, ALBERT. “The Moral Vision: Tolstoi.” In The Meaning of Fiction. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, pp.179-201. Analyzes the moral meaning of War and Peace. Argues that Tolstoy communicates his moral message by way of the actions taken by Natasha, who is a good example of his morality. 3. FREEBORN, RICHARD. T urgenev: The Novelist’s Novelist. London: Oxford University Press, 1960. Surveys Turgenev’s novels, with the purpose of illuminating the features of Tolstoy’s female characters. Claims that Turgenev’s female characters have importance both for Russian and European literature. Concludes that the female characters reveal their true natures, e.g., their moral standards. 55 4. JACKSON, ROBERT L. “Doctor Zhivago and the Living Tradition.” SEEJ 4 (1960): 103-118. A comparison of feminine features in Pastemak’s Lara and Tolstoy’s Natasha. Considers that both women are extraordinary examples of female characters in Russian literature. 1961 1. OBOLENSKY, DIMITRY. “The Poems of Doctor Zhivago.” SEEJ 40 (1961): 123-135. A thorough explanation of the relationship between prose and poetry in Doctor Zhivago. Elaborates on their similarities and compares individual poems with their prose counterparts. Considers women characters in Doctor Zhivago to be unique creations of Pasternak. 2 STRUVE, GLEB. “On Chekhov’s Craftsmanship: The Anatomy of a Story.” Slav R 209 (1961): 465-476. Briefly examines Chekhov’s female characters and says that his female characters are located between dream and reality. Maintains that Chekhov reveals his female characters’ inner lives through a whole range of ironic devices. 1962 1. BUFFORD, WILLIAM S. Six Contemporary Novels: Six Introductory Essays in Modern Fiction. Edited by William Sutherland. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1962. Considers Lara to be an exceptional female character. Claims that Lara is the central female character in Doctor Zhivago. Adds that Pasternak reveals his 56 talent by creating such an extraordinary woman character as Lara in Russian literature. 2 DOBIN, E.S. Geroi, Siuzhet, Detal’. [ Hero, Plot, Detail]. Leningrad: Sovetskii Pisatel’, 1962. Describes how Chekhov used details in order to portray his female characters by means of objective observations. Concludes that Chekhov is very sympathetic towards women and is not a woman hater, as many critics have portrayed him. 3. DYCK, W. J. “Doctor Zhivago: A Quest for Self-Realization.” SEEJ 6 (1962): 1 1 7-123. Maintains that the key to Doctor Zhivago should be sought in Lara, her self-realization and concept of life, as well as her outlook on culture and religion. Argues that Pasternak expresses modern Russian society through Lara, who is the best example of life in its entirety. 4. LUKACS, GYORGY. The Historical Novel. Translated from the German by Hannah and Stanley Mitchell. London: Merlin, 1962. A broad sm'vey of the historical scene in War and Peace, which reveals the background for the spiritual development of the novel’s main female character, Natasha. Concludes that Tolstoy’s view of his female characters and history are of questionable relationship to the movement of radical democracy. 5. MATLAW, RALPH E. “Mechanical Structure and Inner Form: A Note on War and Peace and Doctor Zhivago.” In Symposium 16, no. 4 (1962): 288-295. 57 Examines how Tolstoy constructs his female characters. Compares Pastemak’s female characters in Doctor Zhivago with Tolstoy’s in War and Peace. 6. PIROGOV, G. P. Alexander Nikolayevich Ostrovsky: Seminariia [Alexander Nikolayevich Ostrovsky: Seminary]. Leningrad: Gosudarstvennoe uchebno- pedagogicheskoe izdatel’stvo, 1962. Details the major characteristics of Katerina, including her goodness and thoughtfulness. Concludes that Katerina is the most positive of Ostrovsky’s female characters. 7. SHTEIN, A.L. Kriticheskii realizrn irusskaia drama XIX veka. [Critical realism and nineteenth century Russian drama]. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1962. Focuses on nineteenth-century Russian drama and the suffering of female characters as portrayed by Chekhov in Uncle Vanya, The Seagull, and The Cherry Orchard. 8. WELLEK, RENE. “Tolstoy’s War and Peace: A Study.” Slav R 7 (1962): 599- 601. Discusses how Tolstoy depicts his female characters and how they interrelate with each other. Thinks that selflessness and passion are the basic characterizations of most of the women in War and Peace. 1963 l. MARSHALL, RICHARD H. “Chekhov and the Russian Orthodox Clergy.” SEEJ 7 (1963): 375-391. 58 Points out that Chekhov’s humanistic philosophy, a secular version of the traditional Judaeo-Christian ethic, plays a prominent role in the creation of his ideal Russian woman. 2 WEIT Z, MORRIS. “Anna Karenina: Philosophy and the Word.” In Philosophy in Literature: Shakespeare, Voltaire, Tolstoy & Proust. London: Athlone Press, pp. 24-39. Maintains that Anna’s tragic life is generally interpreted as being a corruption. Concludes that Anna’s tragedy and situation as a woman in Russian society caused her to be examined closely in philosophical and sociological studies. 1964 1. BERCOVITCH, SAVCAN. “Dramatic Irony in Notes from the Underground.” SEEJ 8 (1964): 284-291. Insists that Dostoevsky’s female characters embody the liberty of the human spirit. Dostoevsky finds the essence of women’s identity. Adds that his female characters are usually shy, bewildered characters who overcome their humiliation with compassion, and through recognition of someone else’s suffering. The self-transcendence of the female characters is an act both of free will and of faith. 2 BLACKMUR, RICHARD P. “The Dialectic of Incarnation: Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina.” In Eleven Essays in the European Novel. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, pp. 3-26. Discusses the illegal love affair between Anna and Vronsky. In addition, 59 the legal relationship between Kitty and Levin and their interaction with Russian society is also discussed. Suggests several parallels between the Anna-Vronsky and Kitty-Levin love affairs. 3. BOGOSLOVSKI, NIKOLAI VENIAMINOVICH. T urgenev. [Turgenev]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo ‘Molodaia Gvardiia’, 1964. Analyzes how Turgenev depicts the imperceptible changes that take place in relationships; the doubts, jealousies, hopes, and fears that rise and fall in emotional intensity. Also examined are the love and hate between female and male characters in which the issue of happiness usually causes tragedy. Adds that the love female characters deserve is understood as self-fiflfillment and concludes, therefore, that love is always guilty. 4. CONRAD, JOSEPH L. “Turgenev’s Asya: An Analysis.” SEEJ 8 (1964): 391- 400. Discusses the female character Asya. Argues that Asya is lured into a whirlwind of passion, which results in the tragic end of her life. 5. CORRIGAN, ROBERT. Introduction to Six Plays by Chekhov. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston, 1964. Expresses the inner lives of Chekhov’s female characters in a comic and ironic tone. Claims that Chekhov’s short stories and plays are not engaged in depicting, but actually imitate the life of his female characters. 6. DELANEY, SISTER CONSOLATA, BVM. “Turgenev’s Sportsman: Experiment in Unity.” SEEJ 8 (1964): 17-24. 60 Argues that the Notebook of a Sportsman provides a series of sketches detailing the lives of women in the Russian countryside. Says that women’s personalities and their social conditions give rise to the poignant and tragic situation of women in nineteenth century Russian life. Also discusses the habits of female characters as reflections of Turgenev’s own views, as the descriptions of women are pure, simple and sensible. Concludes that Turgenev’s simplicity, tragedy, humor, irony, anger, and optimism are all represented in his female characters. 7. GIFFORD, HENRY. “Tolstoy: Art and Conscience.” In The Novel in Russia from Pushkin to Pasternak. London: Hutchinson, pp. 85-96. Discusses the characteristic development of the leading female character Anna in Anna Karenina, using Tolstoy’s view of women. Determines that happiness cannot be found if moral values are absent and laws are broken. 8. . “Doctor Zhivago: A Novel in Prose and Verse.” In The Novel in Russia. From Pushkin to Pasternak. London: Hutchinson University Library, pp. 185-194. Treats the main female character Lara within the context of philosophical developments and social events. 9. IVAN OV, SERGE] VASILEVICH. Lermontov: Zhizn ’ i tvorchestvo. [Lermontov: Life and works]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo “Prosveshchenie”, 1964. Says that unlike Maksim Maksimich, the female character Bela in Bela is stylized to conform to the Romantic conception of a beautiful Caucasian woman framed by the concrete details of a realistic point of view. 61 10. KASPIN, ALBERT. “Character and Conflict in Ostrovskij’s Talents and Admirers.” SEEJ 8 (1964): 26-36. Argues that the basic strength of Ostrovskii’s dramatic work lies in his conception of the major female character, Katerina. In his portrayal, she is pictured as a very important female type. Ostrovskii demonstrates her immediate problems as well as her achievements. Kaspin also points out that she represents a multiplicity of cross-purposes and conflicting aims and desires that arise from tensions and capture the interest of the spectator. 11. MU CHNIC, HELEN. “The Leap and the Vision: A Note on the Pattern of Dostoevsky’s Novels.” SEEJ 8 (1964): 379-399. Declares that Dostoevsky’s female characters, for all their apparent philosophical and moral lessons, are endowed with passion. Dostoevsky’s women always discuss current problems. 1965 1. DAVIE, DONALD. Commentary on the Poems of Doctor Zhivago. Translated by Donald Davie. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1965. Examines Pastemak’s view of Christianity and its effects on woman in Russian literature. Examines the poem Hamlet. Gives an important understanding of Hamlet’s attitude towards women. 2. FOWLER, AUSTIN. Leo Tolstoy ’s War and Peace. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1965. Discusses each of the novel’s female characters in relation to the structure and plot. Finds that Tolstoy has tried to develop many features in his female 62 characters, emphasizing their spiritual relationships. 3. HAGAN, JOHN. “The Tragic Sense in Chekhov’s Earliest Stories.” Criticism 7 (1965): 52-80. Shows that Russian women are dependent on society. Maintains that Chekhov’s female characters are serio-comic and speak directly to the twentieth century. 4. HOWELLS, WILLIAM DEAN. “The Philosophy of Tolstoy.” In Criticism and Fiction and Other Essays. New York: New York University Presss, pp. 167- 179. A detailed discussion of Tolstoy’s philosophy in the context of life, religion and society, as well as its effect on his female characters, in general. All female characters in Tolstoy are realistic and in harmony with his philosophy, possessing penetrating honesty and judgment. 5. PUSHKIN, ALEXANDER SERGEEVICH. Evgeny Onegin. Translated by Oliver Elton. London: Pushkin Press, 1965. Defines Evgeny Onegin as a forerunner of the Russian character-novel in which psychological analysis of the female character is in perfectly natural form, but blended with romance and satirical pictures. 6. REASKE, HERBERT E. Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1965. A broad study of Anna Karenina, analyzing details, the novel’s plot, poetics, and Anna’s well-known femininity. Addresses a wide range of questions which have not been answered concerning the novel’s main and minor female 63 characters. 7. SILBAJORIS, RIMVYDAS. “The Poetic Texture of Doctor Zhivago.” SEEJ 9 (1965): 19-27. Declares that Doctor Zhivago presents women as an invitation to share some mysterious, beautifirl insight into life and lyrical emotion. Maintains that the plot of Doctor Zhivago establishes a fateful spiritual bond in Lara’s characterization. Says that Doctor Zhivago transforms the individual, Lara, into a universal myth. 8. STURMAN, MARIANNE. Anna Karenina: Notes. Lincoln, Nebraska: Cliff’s Notes, 1965. A brief study of Anna Karenina with critical notes about Anna’s character sketches along with a discussion of the structure of the social, religious and moral issues that affect her life. 1966 l. CONRAD, JOSEPH L. “Cexov’s the Man in a Shell: Freedom and Responsi- bility.” SEEJ 10 (1966): 400-410. Discusses Chekhov’s consideration of personality, moral responsibility, freedom, and self-realization through his female characters. Women are imbued with the spirit of everyday life. Chekhov allows his female characters to convey the meaning of life and existence. 2 ANUILOV, V.A. Geroi nashego vremeni: Kommentarii. [A Hero of Our Time: Commentary]. Moscow-Leningrad: “Prosveshchenie,” 1966. Discusses Mary, Vera and Bela in contrast to Pechorin, whom he does not regard as the hero of the novel. His portrayal of Bela (within the framework of the Romantic female character) is well known in criticism on the novel. 3 MURRY, JOHN MIDDLETON. F yodor Dostoevsky: A Critical Study. New York: Russell & Russell, 1966. Asserts that close reading of Dostoevsky’s major novels seems to be the only way to fully understand Dostoevsky’s female characters. Strongly believes that Dostoevsky’s female characters seem to be close to him and carry their author’s messages. 4 REEVE, F.D. “Doctor Zhivago.” In The Russian Novel New York: McGraw - Hill, pp. 360-378. Makes several worthy observations concerning the meaning of love and destiny in a woman’s life. Examines Pastemak’s views of Lara as being a pure and inherently nice female character in Doctor Zhivago. 5. SPEIRS, LOGAN. “Anna Karenina: A Study in Structure.” Neophilologus 50 (1966): 3-28. Examines the characterization of Anna. Maintains that Tolstoy presents Anna in detail. She is seen functioning in many different settings in order to give readers a full picture of her personality. 65 6. WILLIAMS, RAYMOND. “Social and Personal Tragedy: Tolstoy and Law- rence.” In Modern Tragedy. Stanford, California: University of Stanford, pp. 121-138. Compares and contrasts female characters in Tolstoy and D. H. Lawrence. Discusses the tragedies experienced by women in these writers' works in terms of both social and personal aspects. 1967 l. ALLEN, PAUL. “Anna Karenina’s Crime and Punishment: The Impact of Historical Theory upon the Russian Novel.” Mosaic 1 (1967): 94-102. Concentrates on Anna Karenina’s inner world and claims that she is labeled as tragic due to her adultery and marriage. 2. CHUKOVSKY, KORNEI. 0 Chekhove. [About Chekhov]. Moscow: Khudo- zhestvennaia literatura, 1967. Tries to find a solution to the misunderstandings surrounding the complex, female characters in some of Chekhov’s short stories. Explains that Chekhov is able to see the uniqueness of his female characters in a rather optimistic manner. 3. EYKHENBAUM, M. BORIS. “ ‘Knyaginya Ligovskaya’” - “‘Geroi Nashego Vremeni’” [“ ‘Princess Ligovskaya’” - “ ‘A Hero of Our T ime’”]. V Lermontove [In Lermontov]. Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, pp. 146-156. Discusses in detail the characters of Princess Ligovskaya, Princess Mary, Vera, and Bela. They serve to better describe the image of Pechorin, but not the image of their own female characters. 66 4. FAN GER, DONALD. Dostoevsky and Romantic Realism: A Study of Dostoevsky in Relation to Balzac, Dickens and Gogol Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1967. Examines Gogol’s and Dostoevsky’s context and place in the tradition of romantic realism, as well as the effects of the female characters in their main works. 5. MESHAKOV-KARIAKIN, IGOR’. “K probleme lichnosti v romane Doktor Zhivago (Lichnost’ i Khristianstvo ).” [Towards a definition of personality in Doctor Zhivago (Personality and Christianity”. Melbourne Slavic Studies 1 (1967): 34-48. Argues that the importance of female characters in Doctor Zhivago should be carefully observed. Connects women’s personalities with Christianity. 6. MLIKOTIN, ANTHONY M. “The International Theme in the Novels of Ivan Turgenev. ” Resch St 35 (1967): 1-10. Analyzes the characterizations of Turgenev’s major female characters, finding a consistent implication of something essentially ridiculous in their natures. 7. PROFFER, CARL. The Simile and Gogol ’s Dead Souls. The Hague: Mouton & Co. N.V., 1967. Maintains that sirniles provide a kind of evidence and presence to disprove the conception that Gogol’s female characters are simple. 8. REXROTH, KENNETH. “Tolstoy, War and Peace.” In Classics Revisited. Chicago: Quadrangle, pp. 263-267. Praises the variety and sensibility of female characters, and notes that their 67 author’s philosophy is presented through them. Tolstoy’s religious conversion and general philosophy are examined as an extension of his search for the souls of his female characters. 9. ROWLAND F. MARY and PAUL ROWLAND. “Struggle for Lara / Russia.” In Pasternak ’s Doctor Zhivago. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, pp. 66-79. A detailed study of Lara, who is analyzed frbm different angles. Concludes that Lara is an evil parody of love and a representative of Russian life. 10. ANKAAM, ADRIAN and KATHERINE HEALY. “Anna in Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina.” In The Demon and the Dove: Personality Growth through Literature, pp. 169-196. Argues that Anna is one of Tolstoy’s best female characters depicted as a fantastic woman who goes through a psychological struggle in her personal life that eventually leads to her suicide. Notes that Tolstoy feels sympathy towards Anna as she realizes the moral implications resulting from her subsequent self-condemnation. 1968 1. JACKSON, ROBERT L. “Chance and Design in Anna Karenina.” In The Discipline of Criticism: Essays in Literary Theory Interpretation and History. New Haven, Conn., pp. 315-330. Surveys the devices used in the characterization of Anna. Labels the portrayal of Anna as an “expressive” design, leading to the tragic end of Anna’s suicide. 68 2 MAUGHAM, WILLIAM SOMERSET. “Tolstoy and War and Peace.” In Introduction to Ten Novels and Their Authors. New York: Greenwood, pp. 273-299. Discusses the novel’s vast variety of female characters against the background of the historical period and its society. Adds that War and Peace is praised for the fullness of its female characters' dramatic intensity. 3 MOONEY, HARRY. Tolstoy’s Epic Vision: A Study of War and Peace and Anna Karenina. Tulsa: University of Tulsa Press, 1968. Argues that War and Peace and Anna Karenina have different approaches that allow for an awareness of the female characters’ exclusive qualities. Claims that both novels’ female characters are given a Homeric characterization. Tolstoy brings his heroines and nature into mystical communication. These characteristic qualities of Tolstoy’s art are demonstrated in the numerous female characters in both novels. 4. SEELEY, FRANK F. “Gogol’s Dead Souls.” FMLS 4 (1968): 33-44. Argues that Gogol’s Dead Souls is full of realistic and romantic elements depicting women who are primarily distortions of reality. Identifies three types of female characters in Dead Souls. The first type is a simple woman who is a slave to her husband, the second is a powerful woman in society, and the third, an independent woman interested in sex. 5. WAIN, JOHN. “The Meaning of Doctor Zhivago.” In A House for the Truth: Critical Essays. New York: Viking Press, pp. 128-160. Claims that Lara, as a female character, embodies destiny. Therefore, 69 details of daily life, love, and her innocence are depicted. 1969 1. BRISTOW, EUGENE K. Five Plays of Alexander Ostrovsky. New York: Pegasus, 1969. Notes that the main female characters are present in Katerina’s own tragedy, and this makes The Storm a beautiful play. Stresses that Katerina’s first meeting with Boris is the fatality of a woman’s passion. 2 ERLICH, VICTOR. Gogol New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1969. Focuses on Gogol’s romantic female characters. Reveals some demonic features of his female characters who come across as being repulsive. 3. FEUER, KATHRYN. “Tolstoy the Ascetic.” Rus R 28 (1969): 222-224. A short analysis of Tolstoy’s views about freedom, physicality, and his spiritual characterization of womanhood. Maintains that it is impossible to find a woman willing to become an ascetic for religion. Claims that Tolstoy is one of the first Russian authors with significance in the cultural life of Europe. 4. LAVRIN, JAN KO. Dostoevsky: A Study. New York: Russell & Russell, 1969. Discusses Dostoevsky’s religious values and the spiritual world which make a significant impression on his female characters. Examines in detail the personalities of his major female characters. 70 5 ILAKH, B. S. “Problemnaia situatsiia, tvorchestvo i chitatel’: Chekhov.”[The problematic situation, the work, and the reader: Chekhov]. In T alant pisatelia i protsessy tvorchestvo. [In The Writer’s talent and the processes of creation]. Leningrad: Sovetskii Pisatel’, pp. 305-435. Examines Chekhov’s approach to women in his stories. Pays attention to Chekhov’s descriptions of the inner lives of his female characters. 6. SINYAVSKY, ANDREI. “Boris Pasternak.” In Pasternak: Modern Judgements. Edited by Donald Davie and Angela Livingstone. London: Macmillan, pp. 154-219. Brings different approaches to Pastemak’s Lara. Examines Lara in terms of Pasternak’s religious feelings and worldview. 7. TERRAS, VIKTOR. The Young Dostoevsky (1846-1849): A Critical Study. The Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1969. Thinks that the early Dostoevsky had no difficulty creating his female characters. Each had her own exclusive personality. 1970 l. ANZULOVICH, BRANIMIR. “Tolstoi and the Novel.” Genre 3, no. 2 (1970): 242-244. The form of the novel and Tolstoy’s attitude towards women are examined through War and Peace and Anna Karenina. 2 CRAWFORD, VIRGINIA M. “War and Peace.” In Studies in Foreign Literature. Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat, pp. 276-308. Emphasizes that War and Peace is considered to be a complete epic because of its fantastic female characters. Tolstoy’s female characters are viewed 71 as the best artistic creation of women in Russian literature. 3 DRIVER, TOM F. “Anton Chekhov.” In Modern Query: A History of the Modern Theatre. New York: Delacorte Press, pp. 217-248. Notes Chekhov’s important dramatic female characters and their originality expressed by their radical views. His female characters are constructed in a new manner that emerges from the expression of sensibility. 4 GURVICH, LA. Proza Chekhova: Chelovek ideistvitelnost’. [Chekhov’s prose: man and reality]. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1970. Suggests that Chekhov’s female characters seem to have feelings of guilt that, unconsciously, make them live dissatisfied and unhappy lives. Examines how Chekhov depicts his female characters’ relationships within society. 5. OSTROVSKY, ALEXANDER NIKOLAYEVICH. Artists and Admirers. Translated from the Russian by Elizabeth Hanson with an introduction by Lawrence Hanson. New York: Manchester University Press, 1970. Argues that The Thunderstorm is a description of love and views its tragic effect on Katerina. Classifies her as a pure, yet fallen woman. Concludes that Ostrovsky’s treatment of Katerina raises the drama to great heights. 6. RHYS, BRINLEY. “Chekhov.” SR 78 (1970): 163-165. Takes a very personal view of Chekhov’s female characters and their identities, pointing out their importance in Russian literature. Explains that Chekhov depicted women’s feelings about reality more than reality itself. 72 7. ROSELL, ELSA Z. “Boris Leonidovich Pasternak.” February 10, 1890 May 30, 1960.” In Russian Authors. Boston: Houghton Miff1in Co., pp. 184- 203. A biography of Pasternak that briefly summarizes Lara’s character, describing her as a distinguished political and philosophical female character in modern Soviet literature. 8. SIEGEL, GEORGE. “The Fallen Woman in Nineteenth-Century Russian Literature.” Harvard Slavic S 5 (1970): 81-107. A detailed analysis of the fallen woman as portrayed in nineteenth century Russian literature. Concentrates on innocents in particular, such as Ostrovsky’ s Katerina. 1971 1. BRIGGS, D. ANTHONY. “Twofold Life: A Mirror of Karolina Pavlova’s Shortcomings and Achievement.” SEER XLIX (1971): 1-17. Argues that A Double Life deals with the problems of Russian society and the position of women in the nineteenth century. Adds that this novel successfully treats the question of women. Believes that femininity is the key that unites prose and poetry in Pavlova’s A Double Life. 2 FEINSTEIN, ELAINE. Marina Tsvetayeva: Selected Poems. London: Oxford University Press, 1971. Argues that Tsvetayeva imbues supernatural qualities and mysticism into her female characters’ souls and behavior. Adds that women shift between religion and poetic romanticism. 73 3. GUNN, ELIZABETH. A Daring Coiffeur: Reflections on War and Peace and Anna Karenina. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman & Littlefield, 1971. Calls Anna Karenina a novel of tragedy and adultery. Discusses Tolstoy’s argument that one should not judge others. Sees his moral philosophy in the main female characters of Anna Karenina and War and Peace. 4. KENWORTHY, JOHN. Tolstoy: His Life and Works. New York: Haskell, 1971. An account of Tolstoy’s life and works. Pays close attention to Tolstoy’s intellectual development and philosophy, which is based on his analysis of female characters and his approach towards them and their rights in society. 5. LINKOV, V. Ia. “Povest’ A.P. Chekhova Duel’ i ruskii sotsialno- psikhologicheskii roman pervoi poloviny XIX veka.” [Chekhov’s tale “The Duel” and the Russian socio-psychological novel of the first half of the nineteenth century]. In Problemy teorii i istorii literatury: sbornik statei posviashchenny pamiati professora A.N. Sokolova. [Problems of the theory and history of literature: a collection of articles in memory of Professor A.N. Sokolov]. Edited by V.I.Kuleshov, R.M. Samarin and A.G.Sokolov. Izdatel'stvo Moskovskogo universiteta, pp. 377-392. Maintains that Chekhov focuses on assessing the social significance of his female characters, as well as considering how a woman lives in her own world. Stresses the concern of his female characters for their place in society. 6. MORGAN, JAMES. Introduction to the Poems of Doctor Zhivago. Translated by Eugene Kayden. Kansas City: Hallmark Cards, 1971. Argues that most of Pastemak’s poems are based on life, nature, and beauty and reflect the female character of the novel. 74 7. PACHMUSS, TEMIRA. Zinaida Hippius: An Intellectual Profile. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1971. Maintains that Hippius’s female characters are a vision of truth and beauty, blended with love and eternal femininity. Views female characters as a means for revealing spiritual reality. 8. PEACE, RICHARD. Dostoevsky: An Examination of the Major Novels, London: Cambridge University Press, 1971. Discusses Dostoevsky’s religious, and philosophical ideas, as well as the dramatic qualities that he gave to the female characters in Crime and Punishment, The Idiot, The Devils, and The Brothers Karamazov. 9. PRUTSOV, N.I. “Ob odnoi paralleli: Anna Karenina Tolstogo i ‘Dama s sobachkoi Chekhova.” [On one parallel: Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina and Chekhov’s “The Lady with the Little Dog”]. In Poetika istilistika russkoi literatury. Pamiati Viktora Vladimirovcha Vinogradova. [The poetics and stylistics of Russian literature: In memory of V.V. Vinogradov]. Edited by M.P. Alekseev, P.N. Berkov, A.S. Bushmin, D.S. Likhachev and V.I. Malyshev. Leningrad: Nauka, pp. 236-246. A commentary on the relationship between Tolstoy’s main female character Anna Karenina in Anna Karenina and Chekhov’s Anna in The Lady with the Little Dog. Says that prohibited love does not affect Chekhov’s female character in a negative way, as is the case with Tolstoy. 1972 l. DREISTADT, ROY. “A Unifying Psychological Analysis of the Principal Characters in the Novel by Boris Pasternak.” Psychology 9, no.3 (1972): 22- 35. 75 Discusses the characters Zhivago, Lara, Antipov, and Tanya. Concludes that Lara’s independence seems to come from her role as a fallen woman. 2. GOTMAN, SONIA. “The Role of Irony in Chekhov’s Fiction.” SEEJ 16 (1972): 297-306. Argues that Chekhov sees women and their situations as being too weak and closed to reality. Concludes that the characterizations of women in Chekhov’s works are replete with irony. 3. OATES, JOYCE CAROL. “Chekhov and the theater of the absurd.” In The Edge of Impossibility: Tragic Forms in Literature. New York: Vanguard, pp.115-l37. Examines female characters in the context of social issues in The Cherry Orchard and The Three Sisters. Maintains that Chekhov’s female characters are isolated from one another and that there are always misunderstandings between them. Concludes that the women in both plays h0pe to enjoy happiness someday in the future. 4. SIMMONS, ERNEST J. “The Writing of War and Peace.” In Slavic Studies. Freeport, N.Y.: Books for Libraries Press, pp. 180-198. Theorizes that some female characters in the novel developed out of real events in Tolstoy’s life. Claims that War and Peace is an expression of love towards female characters, family, and life that Tolstoy wanted to declare openly. 76 5. STYAN, J. L. Chekhov in Performance: A Commentary on the Major Plays. Cambridge University Press, 1972. A revised version of Chekhov’s plays that is interesting due to the detailed illustration of female characters. Each woman is described in the context of Russian history. For the most part, the women have no sense of self and become dependent on men. 6. THOMAS, BORIS. “Boris Pasternak” In The Premature Revolution. London: Methuen, pp. 260-276. A study in the means of the characterization of Lara. Suggests that Pasternak portrays Lara as a ‘ panoramic picture’ of the Russian revolution. Also compares Lara with Russia, and claims that she is an intellectual and ethical ideal. 1973 1. FREEBORN, RICHARD. “Turgenev at Ventnor” SEER 51 (1973): 387-412. A close reading of female characters in Fathers and Sons. Discusses upper class women and their social lives. 2. . “War and Peace” In The Rise of the Russian Novel Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, pp. 208-266. Discusses the novel’s prominent female characters. 3. GIFFORD, H. “Turgenev” In Nineteenth Century Russian Literature: Studies of Ten Russian Writers. Edited by John Fennel]. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, pp. 143-167. Notes that Natalya in Rudin seems to be a trustworthy, yet elusive female character in contrast with Olga in Oblomov. Praises Turgenev’s ability to express 77 the mannerisms of female characters and to analyze them critically within their social settings. Examines the novels Fathers and Sons, On the Eve, Rudin, Virgin Soil and Smoke. 4. HARDWICK, ELIZABETH. “Seduction and Betrayal, Part II.” NYR Bks 20, no.10 (1973): 6-10. A philosophical discussion of the seduction and betrayal of a nameless female character. Stresses the jealousy of her husband, which led to her tragic end. Claims that this nameless female characterization goes against Tolstoy’s concept of marriage and family life. 5. MALLAC, GUY DE. “Pasternak and Religion” Rus R 32, no.4 (1973): 360-375. Details Pastemak’s religious views as applied to Lara and Zhivago, and links these views with the New Testament. 6. PITCHER, HARVEY. The Chekhov Play: A New Interpretation. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1973. Examines Chekhov’s female characters’ emotional lives. Says that Chekhov is more concerned about what women think, rather than about them personally, even about the lives they dream of achieving. Argues that women exemplify the major theme of despair and unhappiness. 7. SAMPSON, R. V. “Leo Tolstoy” In Tolstoy: The Discovery of Peace. London: Heinemann, pp. 108-167. Analyzes the female character’s ambition and the nature of power in War and Peace. Concludes that Tolstoy’s women are a source of love and family 78 happiness. 1974 1. GILMAN, RICHARD. “Chekhov” In The Making of Modern Drama. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, pp. 116-156. Argues that Chekhov’s female characters’ dramatize the social process. Thinks that women generally possess an ethical criterion, such as inner freedom or spiritual independence. 2. HARRIS, JANE GARY. “Pasternak’s Vision of Life: The History of a Feminine Image.” RLT 9 (1974): 389-421. Emphasizes the role of Lara as Pasternak’s leading feminine image. Gives various interpretations of Lara’s role as a female character. 3. KATSELL, JEROME H. “Character Change in Chekhov’s Short Stories.” SEEJ 18 (1974): 377-383. Examines the depiction of Chekhov’s female characters. Claims that women in Chekhov’s stories are united in psychological, philosophical, and sociological reality. Also examines Chekhov’s changing attitude towards his female characters. 4. LINDSTROM, THAIS. Nikolai Gogol. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1974. Examines female characters in Dead Souls, maintaining that its female characters stand apart from female characters of other works. Sees the novel as a 79 mixture of Dostoevsky’s humanitarianism, Chekhov’s humor and Turgenev’s bucolic existence in Gogol’s female characters. 5. LOTMAN, M.L. “Ostrovskii i literaturnoe dvizhenie (1850-1860).” [Ostrovsky and literary Movement (1850-1860)]. V A. N. Ostrovsky iLiteraturno- teatralnoe dvizhenie XDt-JOI vekov. [In A. N. Ostrovsky and the literary- theatrical movement XIX-XX centuries]. Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo “Nauka”, pp. 83-111. Argues that Ostrovsky’s Katerina is one of the greatest female characters in Russian drama. Shows that moral and social values have a significant effect on Katerina. 6. ZOSHCHENKO, MIKHAIL. “Woe to Wit.” In his Before Sunrise. Translated by Gary Kern. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Ardis, pp. 270-282. Asserts that Gogol fears women. As a result, his attitude towards women is not warm and sympathetic. In his personal life, this fear is related to his mother. Therefore, his attitude towards women is unsympathetic and fearful, as is his attitude towards his mother. 1975 1. DUCUSIN, DIONTSIO S. “The Experience of Nothingness in Anna Karenina: A Study of Essential Differences of Anna and Alexandrovieh.” SLRJ 6 (1975): 293-305. A brief survey of Tolstoy’s reference to essential differences between Anna and Alexandrovieh. Pays attention to Anna’s femininity, her transformation into a fallen woman and Anna’s reception by her former friends. 80 2. HARDY, BARBARA. “Forms and Themes.” In Tellers and Listeners: The Narrative Imagination. London: Athlone Press, pp. 150-154. A brief summary of a woman’s feelings about love. Tells about the strong and sincere love between Natasha and Andrey. Concludes that Tolstoy’s female characters are prone to be deeply involved in relationships. 3. JONES, W. GARETH. “The Seagull’s Second Symbolist Play-within-the Play.” SEER 53 (1975): 17-26. Maintains that The Seagull demonstrates a new form of female character, changing from the external perspective to the internal. 4. KAGAN-KANS, EVA. Hamlet and Don Quixote: Turgenev’s Ambivalent Vision. The Hague: Mouton, 1975. Discusses the humiliating position of Turgenev’s female characters, such as Liza, who refuses to comment while Lavretskij continuously socializes among others. Masterfully categorizes the female characters of Turgenev’s fiction as either pure young women or predatory ones. 5. KUZICHEVA, A.P. “Udivitel’naia povest’: moia zhizn’.” [A remarkable story: My Life]. In v tvorcheskoi laboratorii Chekhova. [In Chekhov’s creative laboratory]. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 270-278. Closely analyzes major female characters who are rebels against the norms of life. Maintains that this view comes closest to Chekhov’s outlook on women. 6. PACHMUSS, TEMIRA. Between Paris and St. Petersburg: Selected Diaries of Zinaida Hippius. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois, 1975. 81 Asserts that femininity is the basis of the whole universe. Concludes that Hippius’ female characters are animated by their thoughts about love and God. 7. SINYAVSKY, ANDREI. “On Boris Pasternak.” In Twentieth-Century Russian Literary Criticism. Edited by-Viktor Erlich. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp. 235-246. Elaborates on the characterization of Lara, the novel’s main female character. 1976 1 . ANN ING, N.J. Literary Attitudes from Pushkin to Solzhenitsyn. Edited by Richard F reeborn. New York: Macmillan, 1976. Examines Pastemak’s attitude and thoughts about women through Doctor Zhivago. 2. CALDER, ANGUS. “Man, Woman and Male Woman: Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina and After.” In Russia Discovered: Nineteenth Century Fiction from Pushkin to Chekhov. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 209-236. Studies Anna as a woman and the milieu in which she lives. Notes that Anna is consistently viewed as a bourgeois-aristocratic woman. 3. CHRISTIAN, R.F. “The Architecture of Anna Karenina: A History of its Writing, Structure and Message.” SEER 54 (1976): 456-547. A broad structural analysis of Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina. Comments that Tolstoy identified Anna as the ideal of love and the passion of womanhood. Adds that Tolstoy sets the small actions of his female characters against the background 82 of the immense elements of nature, which represents a morality incomprehensible to man. 4. FRANK, JOSEPH. Dostoevsky: The Seeds of Revolt (1821-1849). Princeton, NJ .: Princeton University Press, 1976. Views Dostoevsky’s work as a brilliant artistic synthesis of his female characters. Says that the women in Dostoevsky’s works are a panorama of cultural and traditional Russia in the 1840’s. Adds that Dostoevsky’s approach towards women is faithful in dealing with philosophical and social theories of Russian literature. 5. HAIGHT, AMANDA. Anna Akhmatova: A Poetic Pilgrimage. London: Oxford University Press, 1976. Notes that women, in general, have played an important role in their professions. Akhmatova’s female characters are blinded and torn by desire and feelings of abandonment. 6. KASZKUREWICZ, TAMARA. “Postroenie psikhologicheskoi temy v rasskaze A.P. Chekhova Volodia bolshoi i Volodia malenkii.” [The development of the psychological theme in Chekhov’s “The Two Volodias”]. RLJ 105(1976): 47- 59. Discusses the inner world of Chekhov’s female characters. Says that Chekhov’s aim is to elaborate on women’s psychology, as a psychologist would, using dynamic details to suggest inner changes in his female characters. 83 7. KAUFMAN, WALTER. “Tolstoy’s Versus Dostoevsky.” In Existentialism, Religion and Death: Thirteen Essays. New York: Meridian, pp.15-27. Denies that Anna Karenina is one of the prominent examples of female characters in Russian literature. Notes the importance of Anna’s femininity to our interpretation of her female character. 8. RICHARDS, D.J. AND C.R.S. COCKRELL, ed. and trans. Russian Views of Pushkin. Oxford: Willem A. Meeuws, 1976. Argues that Pushkin is close to Russian women and their soil. Regrets that though Pushkin’s art could have provided a satisfactory response to the painful questions of his day, he filled Evgeny Onegin with trivial female characters. Concludes that Pushkin used his female characters to accomplish an emotional game plan and inserted social and cultural problems into their make-up as part of an intellectual analysis of nineteenth-century Russia. 1977 1. FROST, EDGAR L. “The Search for Eternity in Chekhov’s Fiction: The Flights from Time as a Source of Tension.” RLJ 108 (1977): 111-120.” A general survey comparing eternity and contrasting time in Chekhov’s female characters. Says that this contrast creates a tension among them. Examines variant female types that have a belief in eternity, which counteracts the pressures caused by temporality. 2. GIFFORD, HENRY. Pasternak: A Critical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. 84 A detailed comparison of Pastemak’s life and major works. Singles out Doctor Zhivago as Pastemak’s most accomplished work. Focuses on the main characters, Lara and Zhivago. 3. GOVE, ANT ONINA. “The Feminine Stereotype and Beyond: Role Conflict and Resolution in the Poetics of Marina Tsvetaeva.” Slav R 36 (1977): 231-256. Explains that Tsvetaeva’s works demonstrate her awareness of the limitations of the role of women. Says that the reader encounters in her works the use of imagery and diction, which is a recurring pattern in feminist literature. 4. HAHN, BEVERLY. “The Lady with the Dog.” In Chekhov: A study of the major stories and plays. London: Cambridge University Press, pp. 252-263. A commentary on Chekhov’s Anna in The Lady with the Dog, which is a short story about adultery. Hahn's study compares it with Tolstoy’s Anna in Anna Karenina, noting that Chekhov admires Anna Karenina and presents her death as an inevitable consequence of her guilt. Hahn claims that Anna in The Lady with the Dog is a testimony to Chekhov’s belief in the strength of human love in the most difficult circumstances. 5. KELLY, LAURENCE. Lermontov: Tragedy in the Caucasus. New York: George Braziller, 1977. Argues that A Hero of Our Time reveals the female characters at a deep level. Analyzes each female character in Princess Mary and Bela, concluding that the women are, for various reasons, unsuccessful in providing fulfillment and satisfaction to Pechorin. 85 6. THOMAS, M.D. Requiem and Poem Without a Hero. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1977. Presents some interesting ideas about Akhmatova’s search for lyric female characters who would move the reader’s experience beyond the obvious in Requiem and Poem Without a Hero. Points out that Akhmatova’s women are always essential elements in her poems. 1978 1. HAMPSHIRE, STUART. “Doctor Zhivago. As from a Lost Culture.” In Pasternak: A Collection of Critical Essays. Edited by Viktor Erlich. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,1nc., pp. 126-130. Argues that religious descriptions of characters, notably women, dominate the general depictions of the protagonists. Adds that Lara carries the entire novel. 2. IVAN OV, G.V. “Zametki o Chekhove.”[Remarks on Chekhov]. Rus Lit 1 (1978): 175-178. Focuses on Chekhov’s treatment of his female characters, revealing their reflection of the every day realities of life. Says that Chekhov’s temperament is humanist and modern. Concludes that his female characters are mostly social types whose ways of life are determined by their economic situations. 3. PAVLOVA, KAROLINA. A Double Life. Translated and with an introduction by Barbara Heldt Monter. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Ardis, 1978. Reveals the two-part narrative structure by which Pavlova’s novel, A Double Life, is constructed. The poetry section of the novel relates the experiences over the span of a day of the main female character, Cecily. The prose section takes place during the night. Pavlova also depicts the societal life of 86 the time. Critics have drawn attention to Pavlova’s Polish style and use of poetry even before the poetry section begins. 4. WELTY, EUDORA. “Reality in Chekhov’s Stories.” In The Eye of the Story: Selected Essays and Reviews. New York: Random House, pp. 61-81. Examines Chekhov’s thoughts about reality in relation to women’s issues. Says that Chekhov depicts women and their place in society with a combination of reality and tragicomedy. 5. WOODWARD, JAMES. Gogol ’s Dead Souls. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1978. Notes Gogol’s irony in describing his female characters. Thinks that their portraits are a complex mosaic of details. Examines the central theme of Dead Souls, which satirically narrates the lives of women. 6. . “Allegory and Symbol in Gogol’s Second Idyll.” Mod Lang R 73 (1978): 351-367. Finds that Gogol’s female characters are portrayed as having masculinized personalities while male characters display effeminate characteristics. In addition, the combination of women’s masculinization and men’s feminization leads to a symbolic interpretation of Gogol’s works. 7. ZELDIN, JESSE. Nikolai Gogol ’s Quest for Beauty: An Exploration into His Works. Lawrence: Regents Press of Kansas, 1978. Analyzes Gogol’s quest for beauty and comes to the conclusion that 87 female characters are spread throughout his work, and that his interest in reality can also be seen through his conception of feminine beauty. 1979 1 CLYMAN, TOBY W. “The Hidden Demons in Gogol’s Overcoat.” Rus Lit 7 (1979): 601-610. Explores two types of women: the demonic and the beautiful, both of whom are mostly yearning for spirituality. Points out that Gogol tries to define the ideal woman. Maintains that some of Gogol’s stories are full of negative feminine images. 2. FANGER, DONALD. The Creation of Nikolai Gogol. Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1979. Discusses female characters and their relationship with Gogol’s satire, irony, and the grotesque. Considers Gogol’s female characters to be genuine artistic creations in nineteenth-century Russian literature. 3. LINKOV, V. la. “0 nekotorykh osobennostiakh realizma A.P. Chekhova.” In Russkaia Zhurnalistika iliteratura XDI veka. [Russian journalism and literature of the nineteenth century]. Edited by EC. Babaev and B.I. Esin. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo Universiteta, pp. 119-145. Discusses Chekhov’s female characters in terms of their feelings, emotions, and opinions. Notes that his female characters are very isolated from one another. 88 4. POLOTSKAIA, E.A. A.P. Chekhov: dvizhenie khudozhestvennoi mysli. . [Chekhov: the movement of his artistic thought]. Moscow: Sovetskii pisatel’, pp. 340-344. Examines the lives of a number of Chekhov’s female characters, pointing out the circumstances in which they live. Thinks that Chekhov also used images and motifs in order to create a complex universal female type in his works. Finds that Chekhov’s female characters are descriptive and expressive. 5. SHORE, RIMA. “A Note on the Literary Genesis of Doctor Zhivago.” Ulb R 2 (1979): 186-193. Points out similarities between Doctor Zhivago and Crime and Punishment. Analyzes similarities between Lara and Dunya. Concludes that both women have similar life stories. 6. THOMAS, M.D. Anna Akhmatova: Way of all the Earth. Athens. Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1979. Describes, in general, Anna Akhmatova’s female characters as being sensual and spiritual, i.e. their manner of behavior is as though they were half- nun/half-whore. 1980 1. BROIDE, E. Chekhov: Myslitel ’, kh udozhnik: I00-letie tvorcheskogo puti: katastrofa, vozrozhdenie. [Chekhov, thinker and artist: The one-hundredth anniversary of the beginning of his career: catastrophe and revival]. Frankfurt: Polyglott-Druck, 1980. Argues that Chekhov’s perception of women is ironic, skeptical, and humorous. Also thinks that most of Chekhov’s female characters are so complex 89 that they sometimes conceal Chekhov’s message. 2. ESIN, A.B. “O dvukh tipakh psikhologizma.” [On two types of psychologism]. In Chekhov iLev Tolstoi. [Chekhov and Lev Tolstoy]. Edited by L.D. Opulskaia, Z.S. Papernyi and S.E. Shatalov. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 69-82. Argues that Tolstoy and Chekhov use methods of psychological analysis with their female characters to effectively characterize them. Compares the manner of characterization used by both writers. 3. RIPP, VIKTOR. Turgenev’s Russia: From Notes of a Hunter to Fathers and Sons. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1980. Gives a political description of Turgenev’s female characters. Tries to explain women’s rights, the feminist movement, emancipation and their social consequences in the context of cultural issues. 4. SEMANOVA, M.L. “‘Kreitserova Sonata’ L.N Tolstogo i ‘Ariadna’ A.P.Chekhova.” [Tolstoy’s “The Kreutzer Sonata” and Chekhov’s “Ariadne”]. “In Chekhov iLev T olstoi. [Chekhov and Tolstoy]. Edited by L.D. Opulskaia, Z.S. Papernyi, and S.E. Shatalov. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 225- 253. Discusses Chekhov’s influence on Tolstoy’s The Kreutzer Sonata. Addresses differences in their points of view and their approaches to their female characters. 5. SEYMOUR-SMITH, MARTIN. A Reader’s Guide to Fifty European Novels. London: Heinemann, 1980. Notes that Pasternak uses symbolic devices to depict Lara in Doctor 90 Zhivago. Believes that without these metaphoric devices, she would have been a bland or poor character. 6. TULLOCH, JOHN. “The Epic Vision: Woman and Man.” In Chekhov: A Structuralist Study. London: The Macmillan Press, pp. 146-162. Studies a variety of female characters from the lowest rungs of society to the highest. Provides an analysis of the woman question coupled with Darwinist theory. Stresses the need for the education of women. 7. ZLOBIN, VLADIMIR. A difficult soul: Zinaida Gippius. Edited, annotated and with an introductory essay by Simon Karlinsky. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980. Argues that Gippius’ social, sexual, and religious points of view have a significant impact on the creation of her female characters. Asserts that she is very close to her female characters, both physically and emotionally. 1981 1. BERLIN, NORMAND. The Secret Cause: A Discussion of Tragedy. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1981. Compares the female characters in the plays The Three Sisters and Waiting for Godot. Says that both plays end in tragedy, with the female characters living their lives in doubt and uncertainty. 2. EIKHENBAUM, BORIS. “Princess Ligovskaya and A Hero of Our Time.” In Lermontov: A Study in literary-historical evaluation. Translated by Ray Parrot and Harry Weber. Ann Arbor: Ardis, pp. 161-171. Shows that the majority of Lermontov’s female characters are as complex 91 as Pechorin, as well as displaying some negative qualities, such as their slyness. 3. GIPPIUS, VASILH VASILEVICH. Gogol Edited and translated by Robert A. Maguire. Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1981. Uses his own analysis of female characters in other works of Russian literature and compares these views with Gogol’s female characters. Also discusses Gogol’s grotesque narrative method as applied to his female characters. 4. HOOVER, MARJORIE L. Alexander Ostrovsky. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1981. Examines The Thunderstorm and its female characters. Concludes that Katerina succeeds in escaping the narrow mindedness and arrogance of the environment of Boris’s uncle. 5. KRAMER, KARL. “Three Sisters.” In Chekhov ’s Great Plays: A Critical Anthology. Edited by Jean-Pierre Barricelli. New York: New York University Press, pp. 61-75. Reviews and agrees with other critics’ views about the unhappiness of Chekhov’s women in their marriages. Surveys the strong women who gained Chekhov’s sympathy. 6. MORAVCEVICH, NICHOLAS. “Women in Chekhov’s Plays.” In Chekhov ’s Great Plays: A Critical Anthology. Edited and with an introduction by Jean- Pierre Barricelli. New York: New York University Press, pp. 201-217. Notes that the image of women in Chekhov's plays is portrayed differently than his female characters in his other works. Gives a sensitive presentation of the 92 social and psychological dilemmas of educated women who are not considered important members of society. Also thinks that Chekhovian female characters are rich in the variety of their character features. 7. PEACE, RICHARD. The Enigma of Gogol: An Examination of The Writings of N. V. Gogol and Their Place in The Russian Literary Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Discusses Gogol’s artistic personality, clarifying Gogol’s sexual preferences. Most specifically discusses the sexual preference of the old woman in Vij. Points out the demonic power of female characters in The Nose and Vij. Maintains that such depictions indicate Gogol’s inability to deal with women. 8. PUSHKIN, ALEKSANDR SERGEEVICH. Evgeny Onegin: A Novel in Verse. Translated by Vladimir Nabokov. Bollingen Series: Princeton University Press, 1981. ‘ Takes Tatyana’s letter as an example of a large digression to show how naive Tatyana is. Draws our attentions to such digressions as those in the first stanza of chapter eight. 9. STABLEFORD, TOM. The Literary Appreciation of Russian Writers. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Analyzes the meaning of Lara’s love story, including the function of nature. Adds that Pasternak skillfully paints a complete picture of Lara-«her femininity, domesticity, loyalty to her husband and, above all, her unique love for Zhivago. 93 10. WADDINGTON, PATRICK. T urgenev and George Sand: An Improbable Entente. Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University Press, 1981. Pays specific attention to individual characters like Yelena in On the Eve. Points out that Yelena’s idealism comes fiom George Sand. Says that the characterization of Yevgeniya Tur is important. 1982 1. CHICHERIN, A.V. “Leksicheskaia osnova Chekhovskogo stilia.” [The lexical basis of Chekhov’s style]. Rus Lit 3 (1982): 112-118. Explores the gloomy and bright elements of Chekhov’s female characters’ lives and moods. Discusses some distinctive features of the women, stressing their spiritual development, and the advancement of their position in Russian society. 2. FREEBORN, RICHARD. “Doctor Zhivago.” In The Russian Revolutionary Novel:Turgenev to Pasternak. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 210-238. . Focuses on Lara’s spiritual development through philosophical and religious observations in the context of her individualism. 3. GARRARD, JOHN. “A Hero of Our Time.” In Mikhail Lermontov. Boston, Massachusetts: Twayne Publishers, pp. 124-144. Accepts Bela as an answer to Princes Mary. Points out that some characters are more aggressive than others; for example, Vera. Analyzes the actions of Pechorin as a woman hater. 4. MARKOVICH, VLADIMIR MARKOVICH. LS. T urgenev i russkii realisticheskii roman XD’ veka: 30-50-e gody. [I.S. Turgenev and the Russian Realistic Novel of the Nineteenth Century: 30-50's]. Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Leningradskogo universiteta, 1982. 94 Discusses in-depth the qualities of the female characters portrayed in Rudin. Draws attention to the general relationship between female and male characters in Turgenev’s works. 5. SCHULTZE, SYDNEY. The Structure of Anna Karenina. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Ardis, 1982. Concludes that Anna Karenina follows the most prominent features of prose writing. Questions some critics' opinions about Anna, such as her relationship with her husband, son and Vronsky. 6. TULLOCH, ALEXANDER. Nikolai Gogol: Arabesques. Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1982. Studies the symbolic contrasts of female characters in Gogol’s Arabesques, going from the innocent and good looking to the devilish and promiscuous. Maintains that these contrasts greatly affect the style of the story. 7. WILKS, RONALD. Introduction to The Kiss and Other Stories. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1982. Examines the most destructive traits of Chekhov’s major female characters. Stresses women’s evocation of mood and atmosphere, the portrayal of elusive states of mind and fleeting sensations. Maintains that the women are more optimistic than the men in The Kiss, About Love, and Anna Around the Neck, a change from Chekhov’s earlier stories and plays. 8. WOODWARD, JAMES. The Symbolic Art of Gogol: Essays on His Short Fiction. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1982. 95 Strongly argues the case for making a firm distinction between female and male characters. Says that Gogol’s female characters are more masculine than his male characters. 1983 l. BITSILLI, M. PETER. “Dramatic Works.” In Chekhov ’s Art: A Stylistic Analysis. Translated by Toby W. Clyman & Edwina Jannie Cruise, Ann Arbor: Ardis, pp. 115-124. Argues that Chekhov does not frame female characters because they are ideal classical types-«full of human passion, virtue, and wisdom. 2. CHUDAKOV, A. “Istoki Chekhovskogo siuzhetnogo novatorstva.” [The sources of Chekhov’s innovations in poetry]. Rus Lit 3 (1983): 97-111. Discusses Chekhov’s innovation in the creation of a new female character and describes what he derived from his predecessors in Russian literature. Surveys the development of the situation of women in Russian society. Emphasizes women’s hopeless destiny, which is mentioned in Chekhov’s previous works. 3. COFFIN, LYN. Anna Akhmatova: Poems. Introduction by Joseph Brodsky. New York. W. W. Norton & Company, 1983. Argues that most of Akhmatova’s poetry is full of intimacy and femininity. Adds that Akhmatova’s female characters are usually betrayed and tormented either by jealousy or guilt. The majority of these poems talk more 96 about self-reproach than anger. 4. HAYWARD, MAX. Writers in Russia: (1917-1978). Edited and with an introduction by Patricia Blake. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983. Emphasizes the main features that shape Lara’s character---Zhivago’s love of her, the meaning of music, and the effects of music and other art forms. 5. LEE, NICHOLAS. “Exposure to European Culture and Self-discovery for Russians and Americans in the Fiction of Ivan Turgenev and Henry James. ” In American Contributions to the Ninth International Congress of Slavists: Kiev. September 1983, Vol.1. Edited by Paul Debreezeny. Columbus: Slavica, pp. 276-283. Analyzes the characterization of Asya which reveals the cultural circumstances and traditional life of Russia at that time. Talks about adultery in A Nest of the Gentry, Smoke and Spring Torrent. Notes that the adultery of female characters causes tragedy to male characters. 6. LEITER, SHARON. “Poem Without a Hero.” In Akhmatova’s Petersburg. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pensylvania Press, pp. 143-191. Maintains that St. Petersburg renewed the genealogy of Akhmatova. Her female characters move without hesitation or conflict towards their fates. Says that Akhmatova’s work Poem Without a Hero portrays the truest image of her female characters. 7. PAHOMOV, GEORGE S. In Earthbound Flight: Romanticism in T urgenev. Rockville, Maryland: V. Kamkin, 1983. Analyzes Turgenev’s early works in reference to his concepts of 97 romanticism. Turgenev uses love episodes to portray his female characters; however, not direct characterization, because his female characters are not idealized to become like Zinaida in First Love. 8. SHKLOVSKIJ, VIKTOR. “Evgeny Onegin.” Translated by Richard Sheldon. RCF 3, no.1 (1983): 225-236. Discusses the characterization of Pushkin’s female characters and examines his views about Tatyana Concludes that Pushkin’s moral values are reflected in Tatyana. 1 984 l. HOLLOSI, CLARA. “Chekhov’s Reactions to Two Interpretations of Nina.” Theatre S 34 (1984): 117-126. Maintains that Nina is depicted as a suffering and struggling, but at the same time, talented woman of strength. Stresses the tragic apeets of her character and views her as a woman broken by life. 2. KREPS, MIKHAIL. Pasternak iBulgakov kak romantisty. [Pasternak and Bulgakov as romantics]. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Hermitage, 1984. Analyzes Zhivago’s attitude towards Lara. Singles out Lara’s positive qualities. Examines Zhivago’s relationship with Lara and the other female characters in Doctor Zhivago. 3. ROSSLYN, WENDY. The Prince, the Fool and the Nunnery: The religious theme in the early poetry of Anna Akhmatova. Hampshire, England: Gower Publishing Company Limited, 1984. Claims that Akhmfiova’s poems express and explore her own inner life 98 and the experience of being personal and psychological rather than national and cultural through her female characters. For Akhmatova, the basic themes of her poems are women’s struggles to have their individuality recognized by their male partners. 1985 1. CLAYTON, J. DOUGLAS. Ice and Flame: Aleksandr Pushkin ’s Evgeny Onegin. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1985. Notes that Tatyana’s rejection of Evgeny is to be attributed to her Russian characteristics. Olga’s role, as a counterpoint to Tatyana, explains the role Tatyana’s and Olga’s mother had in bringing up her daughters. 2. KARLINSKY, SIMON. Marina Tsvetaeva: The Woman and Her Poetry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Argues that her female characters are adolescent and occasionally naive; however, some of the women are depicted as having a devil’s body filtered through a personal vision. Believes that women’s moral behavior is masterfully depicted by Tsvetaeva. 3. KENYON, JANE. Twenty Poems of Anna Akhmatova. Translated by Jane Kenyon with Vera Dunham. Saint Paul, Minnesota: Eighties Press & Ally Press, 1985. Says that Akhmatova sincerely tries to show the suffering of Russian women, voicing their feelings in highly personal lyrics. Concludes that Akhmatova’s women fall in love-«their sufferings not withstanding. 99 4. LIVINGSTONE, ANGELA. Introduction in Pasternak on art and creativity. Edited by Angela Livingstone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Discusses Pastemak’s conception of his female characters. Studies his female character’s opinions about their lives and how they interact with others in Doctor Zhivago. 5. MURATOV, ASKOLD BORISOVICH. T urgenev-Novellist, 1870-1880-e gody. [Turgenev-Novelist, 1870's and 80's]. Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Leningradskogo Universiteta, 1985. Describes Turgenev’s female characters as true to nature with moral overtones. Argues that Turgenev’s approach to his female characters is reflected in his social, political, and literary form. 6. SMYRNIEW, WALTER. “Turgenev’s Emancipated Women.” MLR 80 (1985): 97-105. Studies Turgenev’s emancipated women in his best known novels such as Virgin Soil, On the Eve, Smoke, Fathers and Sons, and A Strange Story. Notes that Turgenev described truly emancipated Russian women who try to escape from traditional Russian society and its law to gain freedom of thought and action. Refutes the typical Russian female type that was prominent at that time. 7. VIDUETSKAIA, I.P. “Ob istokakh rannei prozy Chekhova: Leskov i Pisemskii.” [On the sources of Chekhov’s early prose: Leskov and Pisemsky]. In Chekhov i literatura narodov Sovetskogo Soiuza. [Chekhov and literature of the peoples of the Soviet Union]. Erevan: Izdatelstvo Eravanskogo Universiteta, pp.23-41. Discusses Leskov’s and Chekhov’s female characters, briefly depicting 100 the disorder in their lives. Sees that both authors' works show a similar love and admiration of Russian women. Concludes that like Leskov and Pisemsky, Chekhov had keen insight about Russian women. 1986 1. CONRAD, JOSEPH L. “Turgenev’s Asya: Ambiguous Ambivalence.” SEEJ 30 ( 1986): 215-229. An analysis of the love affairs with emphasis on the homosexual characters who are portrayed, not openly, but through a concealed lexicon. 2. CORNWELL, NEIL. Pasternak ’s Novel: Perspectives on Doctor Zhivago. Essays in Poetics Publications, no.2. Keele Staffordshire: Essays in Poetics, 1986. Discusses Doctor Zhivago’s characters and its structure. Concentrates on women’s issues and female characters such as Lara, Tanya, and a multitude of . second and third degree female characters, including those like Sirna Tunceva, who sometimes function as the author’s mouthpiece. 3. KETCHIAN, SONIA. The Poetry of Anna Akhmatova: A Conquest of Time and Space. Verse translation by ED. Reeve. Munich: Verlag Otto Sagner, 1986. Surveys Akhmatova’s poetry, concluding that she is a unique poet. Beautifully conveys the numerous positive qualities of Akhmatova, whom Ketchian knew intimately. 4. STEFFENSEN, EGIL. “Tema ukhoda v proze Chekhova. [The theme of departure in Chekhov’s prose]. Slav R 4 (1986): 121-140. Studies the departure of Chekhov’s female characters from their homes and normal environments. Stresses the women’s changing moods according to 101 their changes in location. 1987 1. ANDERSON, ROGER B. “The Railroad in Doctor Zhivago.” SEEJ 31 (1987): 503-519. Finds that the symbol of the train plays an important role in modeling the history of the Russian Revolution. Analyzes the symbol of the train in reference to the portrayal of Lara and other major characters. 2. BILL, VALENTINE TSCHEBOTARIOFF. Chekhov— The Silent Voice of Freedom. New York: Philosophical Library, 1987. Sees each of Chekhov’s female characters as being oppressed and without hope. Gives a detailed analysis of their unhappiness. 3. BIRNBAUM, HENRIK. “Text, Context, Subtext: Notes on Anna Akhmatova’s ‘A Poem Without a Hero’.” In Text and Context: Essays to Honor Nils Ake Nilson. Edited by Peter Alberg Jensen. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, pp. 139-145. Expresses his views of Akrnatova’s A Poem Without a Hero, giving interpretations of the most difficult spots of the poem. 4. HELDT, BARBARA. Terrible Perfection: Women and Russian Literature. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1987. A thorough examination of female characters in Russian literature. Analyzes male writers’ fiction that portrays female characters. Explains numerous aspects of female characters. 102 5. MAEGD SOEP, CAROLINA dc. Chekhov and Women: Women In The Life And Work Of Chekhov. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers, 1987. A comprehensive study of Chekhov and his views of Russian women, basing the analyses on some of his short stories such as The Woman in the Cottage, The Chorus Girl, A Woman 's Kingdom, Anna around the Neck, The Bride, The Betrothed, Pink Stocking, and Marriage. Examines the general feelings women have displayed in Chekhov’s works. 6. THORLBY, ANTHONY. “ The Novel, Leo Tolstoy.” In Anna Karenina. Cambridge University Press, pp. 11-104. Discusses Anna as a single philosophical idea in real life and in the context of the novel. Notes that Anna is made to sufl’er solely on account of hypocritical social prejudices that Tolstoy exposes, but allows to prevail. Adds that the unifying thematic interest in Anna Karenina has moral significance in that it also contributes to the structure of the writer’s realism. In addition, it enables him to show through the tragic ending that it is important. Tolstoy makes readers, and the other females such as Kitty and Dolly, feel Anna’s attraction by describing its affects. They are each fascinated by her beauty; idealizing and envying it. 7. VINOGRADOV, VIKTOR VLADIMIROVICH. Gogol and the Natural School. Translated by Debra Erickson and Ray Parrott. Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1987. Links Gogol’s following of the principles of the Natural School with a rather detailed poetics of Gogol as a writer. Pays special attention to the moods of his female characterizations and his adherence to the principles of the Natural 103 School. 1988 1. DAVIES, JESSIE. Anna of All the Russias: The Life of Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966). Liverpool, England: Lincoln Davies, 1988. States that Akhmatova’s Poem Without a Hero accentuates the most mysterious and obscure destiny of a woman ever portrayed by Akhmatova in a poem. Argues that Akhmatova borrows many literary aspects from Russian playwrights, such as Lermontov in Masquerade, when she lets her female characters appear at a ball dressed in masquerade garb. 2. HOISINGTON, SONIA STEPHAN. Russian Views of Pushkin ’5 Eugene Onegin. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988. Insists that Pushkin’s Evgeny Onegin focuses entirely on Russian culture and traditional life. Emphasizes Pushkin’s views of gender. 3. KNOWLES, ANTHONY VERE. Ivan T urgenev Boston, Massachusetts: Twayne Publishers, 1988. Discusses Turgenev’s female characters, particularly those who stand alone, and are not to be generalized. Turgenev’s female characters are individual and passionate. In addition, they are described with sardonic humor and mild satire, which is intended to focus more on the interplay of their feelings. 4. LIKHACHEV, D. In Vzgliad: kritike, polemika, publikatsii. Compiled by A.N. Latynina, S.S. Lesnevskii. [View. Criticism. Polemics. Publication]. Moscow: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1988. A detailed analysis of the image of Lara and the mood of her 104 characterization in Doctor Zhivago. Concludes that Pasternak paints a picture of Russian life in Lara’s depiction. 5. MOLLER, PETER ULF. Postlude to the Kreutzer Sonata: Tolstoy and the Debate on Sexual Morality in Russian Literature in the I890s. Translated by John Kendal. Leiden, The Netherlands: E.J. Brill, 1988. Maintains that the novel’s theme can be understood in reference to Christianity and the theory of biological evolution. Argues that Tolstoy evoked social, psychological, and moral problems. Discusses the question of women’s emancipation. Finds examples for his views in Tolstoy’s The Kreutzer Sonata. 1989 l. BARNES, CHRISTOPHER. “Notes on Pasternak.” In Boris Pasternak and His Times. Selected Papers from the Second International Symposium on Pasternak. Edited by Lazar Fleishman. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Slavic Specialities, pp. 398-413. Describes, in detail, Pasternak’s love for Elena Vinograd, which was painful. Claims that Pastemak’s love for Elena is repeated in Doctor Zhivag --- through his description of Lara’s love for Zhivago. 2. BREGER, LUIS. Dostoevsky: The Author as Psychoanalyst. New York: New York University Press, 1989. A study of Dostoevsky’s psychology links his sensual approach to his female characters with its supematural aspects. Singles out Dostoevsky’s most prominent female characters to better analyze the supematural features found in many of his works. 105 3. DRIVER, SAM. Pushkin: Literature and Social Ideas. New York: Columbia University Press, 1989. A profound discussion of the many aspects of his female characters. Describes the socio-political settings in which his female characters operate. 4. GRAYSON, JANE AND FAITH WIGZELL. Nikolay Gogol: Text and Context. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1989. Includes eight essays on Gogol’s attitude towards his female characters. Analyzes the characterization of the inner and outer worlds of Gogol’s female characters. 5. KOSSMAN, NINA. In the Inmost Hour of the Soul: Selected Poems of Marina T svetayeva. Clifton, New Jersey: Humana Press, 1989. Argues that Tsvetayeva’s poetry is full of dynamism, strength, and intensity of love for her female characters. Her words are emotional, almost physical, gestures that heighten the intensity of their portrayals. 6. LIVINGSTONE, ANGELA. “Lara and Yurii.” In Boris Pasternak. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.49-69. Insists that Lara’s characteristics include revolutionary features. Views Lara as the embodiment of femininity. 7. LOWE, ALLAN DAVID. Critical Essays on Ivan T urgenev. Boston, Massachusetts: G.K. Hall & Co., 1989. Regards Turgenev’s women to be enigmatic, mysterious and enticing in their beauty. Contrasts criticism of Turgenev’s female characters with similarly accepted criticism. 106 8. PEACE, R.A. “A.N. Ostrovsky’s The Thunderstorm: The Dramatization of Conceptual Ambivalence.” Mod Lang R 84 (1989): 99-110. Notes that Ostrovsky paid close attention to the dramatization of events in his masterpiece, The Thunderstorm. Compares the concept of fallen women in the play with that of other fallen women in world literature. Discerns folkloristic elements in the play and focuses on the importance of individualized speech in his characters. Emphasizes that this individualized language is one of the superb features of Ostrovsky’s dramaturgy. Regards Katerina as one of the most successful female characters in Russian literature. Her lover, Boris, is regarded as a failure. 9. PRICE, MARTIN. “ Heroines of Consciousness: James, Turgenev and Flaubert.” In Dilernmes du Roman: Essays in Honor of Georges May. Edited by Catherine Lafarge. Saratoga: Anima Libri, pp. 327-339. A detailed comparison of Turgenev’s female characters with those of James and Flaubert, such as Tatyana in Smoke and Liza in A Nest of the Gentry, James’ Fleda Vetch, the female character of The Spoils of Poynton, F laubert’s Emma Bovary in Madame Bovary, and Felicite in A Simple Heart. Comes to the conclusion that Turgenev gives his female characters greater moral inner beauty and deeper consciousness than do either Flaubert or James. 10. WILLIAMES, LEE J. Anton Chekhov: The Iconoclast. Scranton, Pennslyvania: University of Scranton Press, 1989. Is one of numerous monographs on Chekhov, focusing on Chekhov as an iconoclast. Tries to decode concealed features of Chekhov’s iconoclastic 107 approach. Regards Chekhov as one of the best playwrights in Russian literature. 1990 1 AKHMATOVA, ANN. Translated by Judith Hemschemeyer. The Complete Poems of Anna Akhmatova. Edited and with an introduction by Roberta Reeder. Somerville, Massachusetts: Zephyr Press, 1990. Claims that Akhmatova’s work Poem Without a Hero is a speech given by women who, like Akhmatova, are full of her love, tragic destiny, and Christian feelings. States that Akhmatova is a personal model of dignity, courage, and strength. 2 CLOWES, EDITH W. “Characterization in Doctor Zhivago: Lara and Tanya.” SEEJ 34 (1990): 322-331. Analyzes the characterizations of Lara and Tanya. Prefers Tanya’s characterization to that of Lara's. Finds Lara to be Pastemak’s most successful female character, which reminds one of Pastemak’s own lovers. 3 COSTLOW, JANE T. Worlds within Worlds: The Novels of Ivan T urgenev. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1990. Discusses Turgenev’s views on the sexuality of his female characters in On the Eve, Fathers and Sons, A Nest of Gentry, and Rudin. Points out that sexual preferences are often left enigmatic and unresolved. 4 FORRESTER, SIBELAN. “Bells and Cupolas: The Formative Role of the Female Body in Tsvetaeva’s Poetry.” Slav R 51, no.2 (1990): 232-246. Discusses Tsvetaeva’s poetry while investigating the concept of women’s physicality in Russian culture and religion. Thinks that Tsvetaeva’s female 108 characters transcend that narrow concept. 5 PUSHKIN, ALEKSANDR SERGEEVICH. Eugene Onegin: A Novel in Verse. Translated by James E. Falen. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1990. A thorough analysis of Evgeny Onegin, which attempts to resolve who the most important character is. Maintains that Tatyana is a shy, naive, and provincial woman who is a mercurial muse of Pushkin. 6 SANDLER, STEPHANIE. “Reading Loyalty in Chukovskaia’s Zapiski ob Anne Akhmatovoi.” In The Speech of Unknown Eyes: Akhmatova ’s Readers on Her Poetry. Edited by Wendy Rosslyn. Nottingham, England: Astra Press, pp. 267-285. Argues that Akhmatova documents at considerable length and with unambiguous judgment the behavior of dozens of her female characters. Claims that Akhmatova’s female characters are used as lyrical doubles. 1991 l. NAYMAN, AN ATOLY. Remembering Anna Akhmatova. Translated by Wendy Rosslyn and introduction by Joseph Brodsky. London: Peter Halban, 1991. A comprehensive study of Akhmatova’s memoirs. Akhmatova, according to the author, tries to make her own poetry more readable in the original and in translation. Mentions that Akhmatova related closley with her female characters. 109 1992 1. AMERT, SUSAN. “The Poet’s Lot in Poem Without a Hero.” In A Shattered Mirror: The Later Poetry of Anna Akhmatova. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, pp. 93-130. Finds that Poem Without a Hero serves as a framework for exploring the role and destiny of Russian women. Claims that some of Akhmatova’s lyric female characters are contrasted with Akhmatova and the society they live in. 2. MURAV, HARRIET. Holy Foolishness: Dostoevsky ’3 Novel & The Poetics of Cultural Critique. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1992. Discusses Dostoevsky’s major female characters, such as Nastasya Filippovna, who symbolize national identity. Analyzes holy fools and demonic characteristics. Analyzes Sonia’s role in Crime and Punishment. 1993 1. MAKIN, MICHAEL. Marina T svetaeva: Poetics of Appropriation. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993. Argues that Tsvetaeva’s female characters serve to symbolize her themes and subjects: love, fidelity, and betrayal. In Remeslo and Posle Rossii, in particular, the sexual and literary transgressions in each of these works are described. Makin adds that most of her female characters usually resemble one another. 110 2. MANDELKER, AMY. “The Judgement of Anna Karenina: Feminist Criticism and the Image of the Heroine.” In Framing Anna Karenina: Tolstoy, the Woman Question and the Victorian Novel. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press, pp. 34-57. Explains the image of Anna. Argues that Tolstoy’s attitudes are based on whether characters are male or female. 3. SCHWEITZER, VICTORIA. Tsvetaeva. Translated from the Russian by Robert Chandler and HT. Willetts. Poetry translated by Peter Norman. Edited and annotated by Angela Livingstone. New York: Ferrar, Straus and Giroux, 1993. Studies the feelings of Tsvetaeva’s female characters and their spiritual and se xual intimacy. 4. WASIOLEK, EDWARD. Fathers and Sons: Russia at the Crossroads. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1993. Briefly shows the novel’s different interpretation of love, labels Odincova’s behavior as cruel, and does not justify the rejection of Bazarov. Argues that Fathers and Sons narrates a woman’s love and her personal story. 1994 l. CHEKHOV, ANTON PAVLOVICH. Stories of Women. Translated by Paula P. Ross. New York: Prometheus Books, 1994. Believes that the basic message about female characters is found in simple things such as love, humor, and work. Insists that all female character roles are described through their behavior. lll 2. GREENE, DIANA. “Karolina Pavlova’s ‘At the Tea Table’ and the Politics of Class and Gender.” Rus R vol. 53 (1994): 271-284. Argues that Pavlova’s best known story, At the Tea Table, tells about the love between an upper-class woman and a privileged man, and makes parallels between class and gender hierarchies. 3. GREENLEAF, MONICA. Pushkin and Romantic Fashion: Fragment, Elegy, Orient, Irony. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1994. An analysis of Pushkin’s romantic poems, in which the characterizations of the female characters are only described, not analyzed. 4. KELLY, CATRIONA. A History of Russian Women ’s Writing (1820-1992). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1994. A detailed work on the history of Russian women’s writing, divided into four parts. Focuses on prominent women writers from 1820 tol992. Argues that women writers played an important role in the late 1840’s due to their independence from men. Provides detailed biographical data on women writers. 5. MAGUIRE, ROBERT. Explong Gogol. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1994. A biographical analysis of Gogol. Sees in Gogol a reflection of certain social and political issues where nameless women play a role. Mentions that Gogol creates verbal pictures to describe his female characters. 6. REEDER, ROBERTA. “The Gay Little Sinner Repents: Poem Without a Hero.” In Anna Akhmatova: Poet and Prophet. New York: St. Martin’s Press, pp. 369-432. 112 Argues that Poem Without a Hero was supposedly inspired by Akhmatova’s nostalgia and contains a great metaphysical secret. Discusses her female characters, who reflect her thoughts through their tragic and tormented lives. 7. STRAUS, NINA PELIKAN. Dostoevsky and the Woman Question: Rereadings at the end of a century. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994. Explores Dostoevsky’s main works and concentrates on his female characters and his explanation of feminism. Intends not to impose feminism on the writer, but to elaborate on his feminist opinions. Gives detailed discussions and examples of the exact meaning of the feminine problems that women encounter. 1995 l. GREENE, DIANA. “Gender and Genre in Pavlova’s A Double Life.” Slav R 54, no.3 (1995): 563-577. Maintains that Cecily is a representative of Moscow high society. Adds that A Double Life differs in it's depictions of females and males. Pavlova builds from women’s literary traditions to create a unique mixed genre through which she could tell Cecily’s story, which is presented against the background of women’s position in society. 113 1996 1. HASTY, OLGA PETERS. T svetaeva ’s Orphic Journeys in the Worlds of the Word. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1996. Maintains that Tsvetaeva’s poetry includes voices between the outside world and the female characters’ bodies and souls, drawn in dynamic configurations. Tsvetaeva’s female characters are given commanding presence and powerful voice with which to articulate their views. 2. LEBLANCH, D. RONALD. “Liberating Chekhov or destroying him? Joel Gersmann’s farcical production of ‘The Cherry Orchard.’” In Chekhov Then and Now: The Reception of Chekhov in World Culture Edited by J. Douglas Clayton. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 53-61. Discusses Joel Gershman’s post-modem American production of The Cherry Orchard. Concludes that Gershmann’s version liberates the comic Chekhov from the Stanislavskian captivity of psychology through sexual promiscuity. 3. TURBIN, V. N. Poetika romana A. C. Pushkina “Evgeny Onegin. ” [A.S. Pushkin’s Poeties of novel]. Moskva: Izdatelstvo Moskovskogo Universiteta, 1996. Strongly believes that their Russian culture affects female characters. Shows that through the depiction of typical Russian female characters, a veritable encyclopedia of Russian life is created. 1997 1. DALTON-BROWN, SALLY. Pushkin’s Evgenii Onegin. London: Bristol Classical Press, 1997. 114 A study of female characters in Pushkin’s Evgeny Onegin. Focuses on both Tatyana and Olga. Concludes that each version of female character in Evgeny Onegin tries to find an answer to the woman question. 2. DE SHERBININ, JULIE W. “Distortion of Text in ‘Peasant Women’.” In Chekhov and Russian Religious Culture: The Poetics of the Marian Paradigm. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, pp. 89-105. A broad study of Russian culture based on religion. An elaborate study of Russian religious culture based on Chekhov’s understanding of women’s issues. Presents the Christian perspective of women’s identity-"the paradigm of the virgin and the whore. Argues that Chekhov understands the authority of the Christian paradigm of the two Marys. 3. HOLBROOK, DAVID. Tolstoy, Woman and Death: A Study of War and Peace and Anna Karenina. London: Associated University Presses, 1997. Approaches the complex problems of Tolstoy’s opinion about the depiction of his female characters in War and Peace and Anna Karenina. Gives the opinion that the misogynist view is seen through him and his females’ sexuality. 1998 1. TERRAS, VICTOR. Reading Dostoevsky. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1998. Each chapter treats the special approach Dostoevsky takes towards female characters in one of his novels and the chapters are arranged chronologically. Tries to recognize the writer’s intent as portrayed through his female characters. 115 1999 1 HASTY, OLGA PETERS. Pushkin’s Tatyana. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1999. Regards Tatyana as a reflection of Russian culture and society. Strongly believes in her national identity. Describes Tatyana’s inner perceptions and dwells on their meaning. Pays attention to Tatyana’s dream in Chapter Six. 2. PUSHKIN, ALEXANDER SERGEEVICH. Evgeny Onegin: A Novel in Verse. A Novel Versification by Douglas Hofstadter. New York: Basic Books, 1999. Approaches the novel’s discrepancy from a different point of view, saying that it involves a complex and unpredictable plot which bounces back and forth between female and male characters. 3. RAHMAN, KATE SEALEY. Ostrovsky: Reality and Illusion. Birmingham, England: University of Birmingham, 1999. Argues that The Thunderstorm is a complete drama based on social settings and everyday life. In addition, says Ostrovsky proves the importance of the features he embodies in Katerina. 4. RAYFIELD, DONALD. Understanding Chekhov: A Critical Study of Chekhov ’s Prose and Drama. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1999. A synthesis Of the structuralist, inter-textual, and biographical approaches to Chekhov’s work and his female characters, in particular. Asserts that female characters are far more schematic than men are, citing the female characters of The Three Sisters as a particular example. 116 CONCLUSION This dissertation describes and analyzes female characters in Russian literature, with an emphasis on select, significant characters created by prominent Russian authors. The fate of female characters in Russian literature has been significantly shaped by the fact that most of them have been created by men. A few simple consequences follow from this condition. First, there have been fewer female characters created and developed than their male counterparts. Second, the secondary importance of the vast majority of female characters reflects the socially inferior position of women as a group in Russian society during the times in which the works were written. Third, however realistic or multidimensional these women may be depicted by their male creators, they tend to follow persistent stereotypical images of women, such as the saint/whore archetype of Dostoevsky. The female archetypes examined in this study are by and large products of the worldviews of men: the Byronic postures of Pushkin and Lermontov, the liberal persona of Turgenev, the sociological probing of Chekhov and Gogol, the penetrating psychology of Dostoevsky, the teleological mind of Tolstoy, and the trends and countertrends generated by these various stances and predispositions. A final conclusion regarding the various critical works covered in this study is that the only instances in which female characters have truly transcended the limitations described, occur in the work of authors who are themselves women. Therefore, another task set in this study has been to survey the works of some of the most gifted female Russian authors, who wrote in the face of significant odds, e.g., Pavlova, Akhmatova, 117 Tsvetaeva, and Gippius. The body of criticism strongly supports the fact that the life and character of Russian women can be expressed in artistic literature, outside of the male dominated world. Critics have found that there are close ties between A Hero of Our Time and several of Lermontov’s poems Of that time dealing with female characters. Other critics mention that both Princess Mary and Bela impress the reader and attract their feelings because they are unusual and unique. Generally, Lermontov’s critics share the view that three segments of his novel-«Taman, Maksim Maksimych, and The Fatalist, are ingenious, filled with various details about the daily lives of his female characters. Detailed analyses of Gogol’s female characters have been conducted from the perspectives of various disciplines-theology, mysticism, philosophy, sociology, psychology, and linguistics. Analysis of Gogol’s female characters reveals many qualities of the author himself such as his homosexuality, anxiety, and fear of women. Many critics suggest that Gogol’s women are prone to demonism and mystical conceptions drawn from folklore. Critics point out that Gogol’s female characters are influenced by the Weltanschauung of German philosophy, in particular of nature and woman’s interaction. Yet other critics repeatedly mention that Gogol is a humorist who depicts his female characters in an absurd, irrational, and grotesque manner. It is also noted that Gogol’s women are firmly linked to his aesthetics and strong religious beliefs. They find that Gogol desired to create unique, fantastic female characters, due to his passionate yearning for religious ecstasy, and moral and artistic perfection. Some critics make a point of approaching Gogol’s work from a psychological perspective. Most critics focus on Gogol’s personality, uniqueness and his psychological approach to women, in 118 particular, his ideas on the ideal prototype of a woman. Their views of Gogol’s women are linked to his religious beliefs, his obsession with the Devil, spiritual mood, and imagination as controlled by his humor. In fact, criticism reveals the three types of women most often encountered in most of Gogol’s works; the bad tempered woman, the young beautiful maiden, and the gossiping shrew. Critics also felt that Gogol’s description Of women is marked by awkward narration and absurdity. Gogol’s critics have suggested an interrelationship between Gogol’s homosexual guilt and his religious crisis, leading to religious-psychological approaches to his female characters. Critics of Turgenev often emphasized his personal relationships with many F reneh women authors, especially George Sand. The critics saw Turgenev as a victim of feminine fascination. Critics have revealed Turgenev’s use of tenuous plot points and female characters’s purity as part of his works. He is described as having a natural talent for creating women characters, but twentieth-century criticism has focused on his depiction of the socio-political position of Russian women. The theme of love occupied another important aspect of Turgenev’s female characters. Critics regard the images of women portrayed by Tolstoy in War and Peace, Anna Karenina, and The Kreutzer Sonata as being closely connected to their status in society. They ridicule the actions of Tolstoy’s women based on today’s worldview, which has drastically changed. They argue that by using these three novels as a basis, no one could understand women’s issues. Most critics, regarding Dostoevsky’s female characters in general, agree that they are the least representable, least vocalized, most marginal, but also the most naive images in his novels. Dostoevsky’s female characters and their ideals are connected with 119 his polyphonic views because he cannot resolve the philosophy of women’s voices with modern images of women. For example, Sonia disrupts the model of freedom as shown in Crime and Punishment. It was often emphasized that Dostoevsky’s female characters carried ideas as if they fled from masculinity. Critics have also discovered that Dostoevsky loved traditional and emancipated women. One of the most prominent of Dostoevsky’s female characters is Nastasya F ilippovna, a woman with great and tragic passions, and human needs. Sonia, meanwhile, passes all her tests, and her love for Raskolnikov is steadfast---her saintliness makes her somewhat unreal. However, this fits in with the view that all Dostoevsky’s women are dominated by extremes-«they are either all bad or all good. Ostrovsky’s The Thunderstorm made a significant impact on Russian society. The character Katerina, in particular, is noteworthy in this regard. Due to the play and Katerina, Ostrovsky became popular both at home and abroad, while Katerina herself remained a “luch solntsa v temnom tsarstve” (a ray of sunlight in a dark kingdom”). Criticism argues about Katerina’s many features, but she remains an important female character whose created being is intertwined with Anna Karenina. Chekhov, on the other hand, has an Optimistic approach and good feelings towards women, talking about their education through psychological analysis in his works. All of his female characters are guides to Chekhov’s objectivity and narrative method, revealing his personality and philosophy. Other critics, however, believe that women fi'om varied backgrounds are depicted with irony and that, because of his somewhat negative attitude towards women, many female critics disliked Chekhov. Chekhov seems to want to help women improve their position in life (their rights and 120 education). Criticism tried to prove that Chekhov disliked his female characters because they made a negative impression on him in his youth. Critics Of Chekhov also recognized that he created weak and helpless women during his early period. Criticism, towards the end Of the nineteenth century, began to notice that stronger women were being portrayed. Thus, Chekhov’s Olinka was noted as an ideal woman who was contrasted against emancipated women, among others. It was also emphasized that the term "idealistic woman" began to be a more regular part of the lexicon. As mentioned in Chapter Two. Russian women writers have had a strong influence on the way female characters were portrayed by male writers. Even Pavlova’s A Double Life, after its translation into English, has been accepted as a remarkable literary work. Critics have stressed the social motives of Pavlova’s novel. Criticism, in general, concurs that Pavlova possesses a remarkable talent and that her female characters are portrayed with noticeable sympathy in comparison with her male characters. Pavlova’s greater sympathy for her female characters, as opposed to her male characters, is quite clear. Criticism has established that Akhmatova’s characters always try to make sense of their life experiences. It was noted that her female characters rarely speak their feelings and express themselves through gestures. Critics mentioned the difficulty in the decoding of Akhmatova’s poetry, which is difficult to comprehend properly. It was emphasized that she masterfully used tools to support the themes of love and feminine individuality. Akhmatova’s poetry Often deals with despair, love and characters who have to pay with their own blood for what they have achieved. Most of her women are self-involved, but realize the insufficiency of their lives and that something different is 121 needed. Compared with the descriptions of her male characters, Akhmatova’s female characters are praised to a much greater extent. Finally, Akhmatova commonly involves her female characters in love situations that are painful to them. Criticism of Tsvetaeva’s works generally reflects the view that Tsvetaeva does not portray her female characters the same way she does her male characters. Her poetry, critics insist, is full of despair, and short-term love affairs. The general idea that critics have about her poems is that they are representative of culture, women’s image, genre, and mythology. Her women are usually included in a love situation that is painful and resembles a kind of slavery. Gippius is considered by critics to be one of the pioneering spirits of the religious revival in liberal women’s writings of twentieth century Russian literature. Gippius is credited with using religion in order to achieve equality between female and male characters. Gippius’s female characters are often imbued with religious over tones, illuminating the significance of life and the need for understanding between males and females. Criticism of Pasternak has emphasized the importance of the female character in Doctor Zhivago. Lara has been interpreted in many ways, but most commonly as a symbol of hope. Between the 19705 and 19805, most of the criticism by Russian critics dealing with Doctor Zhivago pointed out that Lara is a human being with human temptations, but also a deeply symbolic figure, a kind of stream that flows through and merges with the novel as an embodiment of suffering and joy. However, the happiness, joy, and unconcem, which are part of the other female characters, are not granted to Lara without an undercurrent of doubt, suspicion, and even physical deprivation. The novel 122 ends on a hopeful note. Lara’s fate, unlike Katerina’s or Anna Karenina’s, is ambiguous and mysterious, in keeping with Pastemak’s way of life. It is a well-documented fact that in the large body of Russian literature written by male and female authors there exist two basic female archetypes. The first is the strong woman who rebels and fights against the social role she has been given. The second is the weak woman who is under the domination of men and meekly accepts her situation. There is no specific type of women who fits exclusively into one category or the other. Rich, poor, uneducated, educated, evil, angelic, all can fit into either category. Through the portrayal of these archetypes and specific female characters, female and male authors communicate their philosophies of life, attitudes towards women’s social roles and status, and religious beliefs. What is particularly interesting is that, despite the fact that this research covered only Russian works of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, these two female archetypes can be found in a wide range of works, whether British, French, German, or American, up to the present time. Perhaps human cultures and their societies are not as disparate as they would seem to be, particularly in the role that women play in them. 123 SUBJECT INDEX A descriptive panorama, 1953.2 A Double Life, 1971.1; 1978.2; 1995.1 A Hero ofOur Time, 1955.5; 1958.4; 1966.2; 1977.5; 1981.2 A Nest of the Gentry, 1983.6; 1989. 9; 1990.2 A Poem Withouta Hero, 1983.7; 1987.3 A Simple Heart, 1989.9 A Strange Story, 1985.6 A Woman ’s Kingdom, 1987.4 About Love, 1982.7 Adultery, 1983.6 Akhmatova, Anna, 1983.7; 1984.3; 1985.3; 1986.3; 1990.5; 1990.7; 1991.1; 1992.2 Andrey (Bolkonsky), 1975.2 Anna Around The Neck, 1982.7; 1987.4 Anna Karenina, 1928.2; 1958.3; 1958.5; 1964.7; 1965.5; 1965.6; 1965.8; 1966.5; 1968.3; 1970.1; 1971.3; 1971.9; 1976.3; 1977.4; 1987.6; 1997.3 124 Anna (Karenina), 1928.2; 1931.1; 1946.2; 1955.4; 1957.5; 1958.3; 1959.4; 1964.2; 1964.7; 1966.5; 1967.1; 1967.10; 1968.1; 1971.9; 1975.1; 1976.2; 1976.3; 1977.4; 1982.5; 1987.6 Antipov (A male character in Doctor Zhivago), 1972.1 Ariadna, 1980.4 Asya (A female character in Asya), 1964.5; 1983.6 Arkadievna (A female character in The Seagull), 1948.4 At the Tea Table, 1994.2 Bazarov (Evgeny Vasilevich), 1993.4 Bela, 1964.9; 1977.5 Bela (A female character in A Hero of Our Time), 1964.9; 1967.3; 1982.3 Boris (Katerina’s boy friend in The Thunderstorm), 1969.1 Cecily (A female character in A Double Life), 1995.1 Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich, 1920.2; 1924.2; 1937.1; 1943.2; 1946.1; 1948.4; 1949.2; 1950.1; 1951.2; 1951.2; 1954.3; 1954.4; 1962.2; 1962.8; 1966.1; 1967.2; 1970.4; 1970.6; 125 1971.5; 1973.6; 1977.4; 1978.4; 1979.4; 1980.2; 1983.1; 1985.7; 1986.4; 1987.4; 1997.2 Contemporary Russian drama, 1924.4 Crime and Punishment, 1943.1; 1952.1; 1971.8; 1979.5; 1992.3 Darwinist theory, 1980.6 Dead Souls, 1968.4; 1978.5 Doctor Zhivago, 1961.1; 1962.1; 1962.3; 1962.5; 1965.7; 1967.5; 1976.1; 1977.2; 1979.5; 1980.5; 1984.2; 1985.4; 1986.2; 1989.1; 1990.1 Dolly (Aleksandrovna Oblonskaia), 1987.6 Dostoevsky, Fyodor Mikholovich, 1929.1; 1952.2; 1964.1; 1969.7 Dunia (Raskolnikov’s sister in Crime and Punishment), 1943.1; 1979.5 Elegiac and lyric tone, 1924.3 Elena Vinograd (Boris Pasternak’s lover), 1989.1 Emma Bovary (A female character in Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert), 1989.9 Epic, 1927.2 Equal rights, 1923.3 Evgeny Onegin, 1943.3; 1957.3; 1965.5; 1957.3; 1965.5; 1976.8; 126 1988.2; 1990.6; 1997.1 Evgeny (Onegin), 1985.1 Fatalism, 1945.6 Fate Of Russian women, 1923 .3 Fathers and Sons, 1973.1; 1973.3; 1985.6; 1990.2; 1993.4 Felicite (A female character in A Simple Heart by Gustave Flaubert), 1989.9 Femininity, 1971.1; 1983.3; 1994.7 Feminist literature, 1977.3 Feminist movement, 1980.3 First Love, 1950.4; 1983.4 Fleda Vetch (A female character in The Spoils ofPoynton by Henry James), 1989.9 Freudian character type, 1972.1 George Sand, 1981.11 Gogol, Nikolaj Vasilevich, 1943.2; 1952.4; 1953.2; 1974.6; 1979.1; 1987.7; 1994.5 Grotesque, 1979.2 Hamlet, 1965.1 Harnletian woman type, 1922.2 Homeric characterization, 1968.3 Humanity of women, 1921.3 Humor, 1964.4 Humorous, 1921.2 Independence, 1923.3 127 Introspective lyricism, 1924.1 Irony, 1924.2; 1964.4 Ivanov, 1948.1 Katerina, 1959.6; 1962.7; 1964.10; 1969.1; 1970.5; 1970.8; 1974.5; 1981.4; 1989.8; 1999.2 Kitty (Aleksandrovna Shcherbatskaia), 1964.2; 1987.6 La Confession d’un enfant du siecle, 1962.6 Lara (Larisa Feodorovna Guishar), 1959.3; 1960.4; 1962.1; 1962.3; 1964.8; 1965.7; 1966.4; 1967.9; 1969.6; 1972.1; 1972.6; 1973.5; 1974.2; 1977.2; 1978.1; 1979.5; 1981.10; 1984.2; 1986.2; 1987.1; 1988.4; 1989.6; 1990.1 Lermontov, Mikhail Yurevich, 1943.2 Leskov (Nikolai Semenovich), 1985.7 Levin (Konstantin Drnitriyevitch), 1964.2 Liza (A female character in A Nest of the Gentry), 1975.4; 1989.9 Madame Bovary, 1989.9 Maksim Maksimich, 1964.9 128 Marriage, 1987.4 Masha (A female character in The Three Sisters), 1948.4 Modern European drama, 1920.1 Modern Soviet literature, 1970.7 Moral values, 1964.7 Nameless female characters, 1952.4 Nastasya Filippovna, 1950.2; 1992.3 Natalya (A female character in Rudin), 1973.3 Natasha (Rostova), 1926.1; 1928.2; 1948.2; 1950.5; 1958.3; 1960.2; 1960.4; 1962.4; 1975.2 Natural School, 1987.7 Nina (A female character in The Seagull), 1984.1 Notebook of a Sportsman, 1964.4 Oblomov, 1973.3 Olga (A female character in The Three Sisters), 1973.3; 1997.1 On the Eve, 1973.3; 1981.11; l985.6;1990.2 Ostrovsky, Alexander Nikolayevich, 1964.12; 1989.8; 1999.2 Pasternak, Boris Leonidovich, 1962.1; 1970.7; 1972.6; 1981.10; 1988.4 Pauline Viardot (Turgenev’s lover), 1946.5; 1954.5 Pavlova, Karolina, 1978.2 Pechorin, 1966.2; 1967.3; 1977.5; 1981.2; 1982.3 129 Pink Stocking, 1987.4 Pisemsky, 1985.7 Poem Without a Hero, 1977.6; 1988.1; 1990.5; 1992.2; 1994.6 Posle Rossii, 1993.1 Princess Ligovskaya (A female character in A Hero of Our Time), 1967.3 Princess Mary (A female character in A Hero of Our Time), 1955.5; 1962.6; 1967.3; 1977.5; 1982.3 Pushkin, Alexander Sergeevich, 1943.2; 1976.8 Ranevskaia (A female character in The Cherry Orchard), 1948.4 Remeslo, 1993.1 Romantic realism, 1967.4 Romanticism, 1958.2 Rudin, 1973.3; 1982.4; 1990.2 Russian women, 1926.2; 1965.3 Sentimentality, 1920.2 Sima Tunceva (A female character in Doctor Zhivago), 1986.2 Smoke, 1957.4; 1973.3; 1983.6; 1985.6; 1989.9 Sonia (Raskohrikov’s fiiend in Crime and Punishment), 1943.1; 1950.2 Spring Torrents, 1957.4; 1983.6 Tonya (A female character in Doctor Zhivago), 1959.3; 1972.1; 1986.2; 1990.1 Tatyana Kuzrninskaya (Tolstoy’s sister in low), 1950.5 Tatyana, 1943.3; 1949.3; 1981.9; 1983.8; 1985.1; 1989.9; 130 1990.6; 1997.1; 1999.1 The Betrothed, 1987.4 The Brothers Karamazov, 1971.8 The Cherry Orchard, 1935.1; 1948.1; 1948.4; 1954.1; 1957.1; 1962.8; 1972.3; 1996.2 The Chorus Girl, 1987.4 The Devil, 1971.8 The Idiot, 1971.8 The Kiss, 1982.7 The Kreutzer Sonata, 1924.1; 1930.1; 1980.4; 1988.5 The Lady with the Dog, 1971.9; 1977.4 The Nose, 1981.8 The Seagull, 1940.1; 1945.2; 1948.1; 1948.4; 1956.3; 1962.8; 1975.3 The Spoils of Poynton, 1989.9 The Three Sisters, 1948.4; 1972.3; 1981.1; 1999.4 The Thunderstorm, 1969.1; 1970.5; 1981.4; 1997.4; 1999.2 The Woman in the Cottage, 1987.4 Tolstoy, Leo Nikolaevich, 1922.1; 1943.2; 1945.5; 1958.3; 1960.2; 1962.5; 1962.9; 1965.4; 1966.5; 1966.6; 1967.10; 1969.3; 131 1976.3; 1980.2; 1987.6; 1988.5; 1993.2 Tsvetaeva, Marina, 1971.2; 1985.2 Turgenev, Ivan Sergeevich, 1922. 2; 1929.1; 1943.2; 1946.5; 1950.4; 1964.3; 1975.4; 1983.4; 1985.6; Uncle Vanya, 1948.1; 1958.1; 1962.8 Vera (A female character in A Hero of Our Time), 1967.3; 1982.3 Vij, 1981.8 Virgin Soil, 1973.3; 1985.6 Vronsky (Aleksei Kirillovitch), 1959.4; 1964.2; 1982.5 Waiting for Gadot, 1981.1 War and Peace, 1927.2; 1928.2; 1942.1; 1943.4; 1945.4; 1945.6; 1948.2; 1950.5; 1955.3; 1958.3; 1958.5; 1960.2; 1962.4; 1962.5; 1962.9; 1968.2; 1968.3; 1970.1; 1970.2; 1971.3; 1972.4; 1973.7; 1997.3 Woman, 1979.1 Women, 1920.2; 1929.1; 1930.1; 1938.1; 1945.1; 1946.3; 1966.1 132 Yelena (A female character in On the Eve), 1981.11 Zhivago (Yurii Andreievich), 1972.1; 1973.5; 1989.1 Zinaida (A female character in First Love) 1950.4; 1954.5; 1983.4 133 AUTHOR INDEX Aldanov, Mark., 1955.1 Allen, Pau1., 1967.1 Amert, Susan, 1992.1 Anderson, Roger B., 1987.1 Arman, Noe1., 1945.1 Arming, N.J., 1976.1 Anzulovic, Branimir., 1970.1 Black, A1ex., 1921.1 Baluhatyi, S.D., 1927.1; 1935.1; 1936.1 Barnes, Christopher., 1989.1 Bates, H.E., 1941.1 Bern, Alfred Liudvigovich., 1938.1 Bercovitch, Savcan., 1964.1 Berdnikov, G.P., 1950.1; 1957.1 Berlin, Normand, 1981.1 Bialyi, G.A., 1954.1 Bill, Valentine Tschebotarioff., 1987.2 Bimbaum, Henrik, 1987.3 Bitsilli M., Peter., 1983.1 Blackmur, Richard P., 1943.1; 1952.1; 1956.1; 1964.2 Bogoslovskii, Nikolai Veniaminovich., 1964.3 Bordinat, Philip, 1958.1 134 Bowra, C.M., 1943.2; 1949.1 Brasol, Boris, 1934.1 Breger, Luis, 1989.2 Briggs, D. Anthony., 1971.1 Bristow, Eugene K.., 1969.1 Brodiansky, Nina, 1954.2 Broide, E., 1980.1 Brooks, Cleanth and Heilman, Robert B., 1945.2 Bufford, William S., 1962.1 Delaney, Sister Consolata., 1964.6 Cairns, Huntington, 1942.1 Calder, Angus, 1976.2 Call, Paul, 1967.1 Cannac, Evgenij., 1960.1 Carr, E.H., 1929.1 Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich ., 1955.1; 1994.1 Chicherin, A.V., 1982.1 Christian, R.F., 1976.3 Chudakov, A.P., 1983.2 Chukovsky, Kornei., 1945.3; 1967.2 Clark, Barrett H., 1940.1 Clayton, J. Douglas, 1985.1 Clowes, Edith W., 1990.1 135 Clyman, Toby W., 1979.1 Coffin, Lyn, 1983.3 Collins, H.P., 1954.1 Conrad, Joseph L., 1964.4; 1966.1; 1986.1 Cook, Albert, 1960.2 Comwell, Nei1., 1986.2 Corrigan, Robert., 1964.5 Crawford, Virginia M., 1970.2 Curle, Richard, 1950.2 Dalton-Brown, S., 1997.1 Dataller, Roger., 1940.2 Davie, Donald, 1965.1 Davies, Jessie, 1988.1 De Sherbin, Julie W., 1997.2 Derman, A.B., 1959.2 Dobin, E.S., 1962.2 Dolinin, A.S., 1923.1 Dreistadt, Roy., 1972.1 Driver, Sam., 1989.3 Driver, Torn F., 1970.3 Ducusin, Dionisio., 1975.1 Dyck, W. 1., 1962.3 Eikhenbaum, Boris, 1967.3; 1981.2 136 Erlich, Victor., 1959.3; 1969.2 Ermilov, V., 1946.1; 1948.1; l95_(0).3 Esin, A.B., 1980.2 Eikhenbaum, Boris M., 1967.3 Fadiman, Clifton, 1955.3; 1957.2 Fagin, N. Bryllin., 1921.2 Fanger, Donald, 1967.4; 1979.2 Farrell, James T ., 1946.2; 1946.3 Feinstein, Elaine, 1971.2 Fergusson, Francis, 1949.2 Feuer, Kathryn, 1969.3 Forrester, Sibelan., 1990.2 Forster, Edward M., 1927.2 Fowler, Austin, 1965.2 Frank, Joseph, 1976.4 Freebom, Richard, 1960.3; 1973.1; 1973.2; 1982.2 Frost, Edgar L., 1979.2 Gailman, Richard, 1974.1 Garnett, Edward, 1921.3 Garrard, John, 1982.3 Gerhardie, William A., 1923.2 Gifford, H., 1964.7; 1964.8; 1973.3; 1977.2 Gippius, Vasiliy Vasilevich., 1981.3 137 Gorki, Maxim, 1958.2 Gotman, Sonia, 1972.2 Gove, Antonina, 1977.3 Grayson, Jane and Faith Wigzell., 1989.4 Greene, Diana, 1994.2; 1995.1 Greenleaf, Monica, 1994.3 Grigorieff, Dimitry Felix., 1959.4 Gunn, Elizabeth., 1971.3 Gurvich, I.A., 1970.4 Hagan, John, 1965.3 Hahn, Beverly., 1977.4 Haight, Amanda, 1976.5 Hampshire, Stuart, 1978.1 Hardwick, Elizabeth., 1973.4 Hardy, Barbara, 1975.2 Hare, Richard, 1959.5 Harris, Jane Gary., 1974.2 Harshkowicz, Harry, 1932.1 Hasty, Olga Peters, 1996.1; 1999.1 Hayward, Max., 1983.4 Heldt, Barbara, 1987.4 Hemschemeyer, Judith., 1990.4 Hingley, Ronald, 1950.3 138 Hoisington, Sonia Stephan, 1988.2 Holbrook, David, 1997.3 Hollosi, Clara, 1984.1 Hoover, Marjorie L., 1981.4 Howard, Sidney., 1926.1 Howells, William Dean, 1965.4 Hudson, Lynton., 1954.4 Ingersoll, Robert G., 1930.1 Ivanov, G.V., 1978.2 Ivanov, Sergei Vasilevich., 1964.9 Ivanov, Vyacheslav., 1952.2 Jackson, Robert Lous, 1960.4; 1968.1 Jameson, Storm., 1920.1 Jane, T. Costlow, 1990.5 Jones, W. Gareth, 1975.3 Kagan-Kans, Eva, 1975.4 Karlinsky, Simon, 1985.2 Kaspin, Albert., 1964.10 Kaszkurewicz, Tamara, 1976.6 Katsell, Jerome H., 1974.3 Kaufman, Walter., 1976.7 Kaun, Alexander., 1922.2 Kelly, Catriona, 1994.4 139 Kelly, Laurence, 1977.6 Kelson, John, 1959.6 Kenworthy, John, 1971.4 Kenyon, Jane, 1985.3 Ketchian, Sonia, 1986.3 Knowles, Vere Anthony., 1988.3 Kossman, Nina, 1989.5 Kramer, Karl, 1981.6 Kreps, Mikhail, 1984.2 Kuzicheva, A.P., 1975.5 Kuzminskaya, Tatyana A., 1948.2 Lavrin, Janko., 1926.2; 1942.2; 1946.4; 1947.1; 1948.3; 1951.1; 1969.4 Leblanch, D. Ronald, 1996.2 Lee, Nicholas, 1983.5 Leiter, Sharon, 1983.6 Likhachev, D.S., 1988.4 Lindstrom, Thais, 1971.5 Linkov, V. 1a., 1971.5; 1979.3 Livingstone, Angela, 1985.4; 1989.6 London, George, 1957.3 Lotrnan, M.L., 1974.5 Lowe, Allan David, 1989.7 Lukacs,GyOrgy., 1962.4 140 Lynd, Robert., 1922.3 Maegd Soép, Carolina de, 1987.5 Magarshack, David., 1954.5 Maguire, Robert., 1994.5 Makin, Michael., 1993.1 Mallae, Guy De., 1973.5 Mandelker, Amy., 1993.2 Manilov,V.A., 1966.2 Markovich, Vladimir Markovich, 1982.4 Marshall, Richard H., 1963.1 Matlaw, Ralph B, 1957.4; 1962.5 Maude, Aylrner., 1924.1 Maugham, William Somerset., 1968.2 Meilakh, B.S., 1969.5 Meister, Charles W., 1953.1 Meshakov-Korjakin, Igor., 1967.5 Micek, Eduard, 1958.3 Mlikotin, Anthony M., 1967.6 Moller, U1fPeter., 1988.5 Mooney, Harry., 1968.3 Moravcevich, Nicholas, 1981 .6 Morgan, Charles, 1945.4; 1950.4 Morgan, James, 1971.6 141 Muchnic, Helen, 1964.11 Muratov, Askold Borisovich., 1985.5 Murav, Harriet., 1992.4 Murry, J. Middleton, 1920.2; 1924.2; 1966.3 Nayman, Anatoly., 1991.1 Nabokov, V1adimir., 1958.4 Oates, Joyce Carol., 1972.3 Obolensky, Dimitri., 1961.1 O'faolain, Sean, 1951.2 Ostrovsky, Alexander Nikolayevich, 1970.5 Pachmuss, Temira, 1971.7; 1975.6 Pahomov, George S., 1983.7 Patrick, George Z., 1932.2 Pavlova, Karolina, 1978.3 Peace, Richard, 1971.8; 1981.8; 1989.8 Pertov, Basil B., 1928.3 Phelps, W.L., 1924.3 Pirogov, P.G., 1962.7 Pitcher, Harvey., 1973.6 Polner, Tikhon., 1945.5 Polotskaia, E.A., 1979.4 Popkin, Henry, 1952.3 Popovkin, Aleksandr Ivanovic., 1958.5 142 Price, Martin, 1989.9 Profier, Carl., 1967.7 Prutsov, N.I., 1971.9 Pushkin, Aleksandr Sergeevich, 1943.4; 1965.5; 1981.9; 1990.6; 1999.2 Rahman, Sealey Katc., 1999.3 Rayfield, Donald, 1999.4 Reaske, Herbert B., 1965.6 Reeder, Roberta, 1994.6 Reeve, F.D., 1966.4 Rexroth, Kenneth, 1967.8 Rhys, Brinley., 1970.6 Richards, JD. and C.R.S. Cockrell., 1976.8 Ripp, Victor., 1980.3 Rosell, Elsa 2., 1970.7 Rosslyn, Wendy., 1984.3 Rowland, F. Mary and Paul Rowland, 1967.9 Sampson, R.V., 1973.7 Sandler, Stephanie, 1990.7 Schakhowskoi, Zinaida, 1945.6 Schepkina-Kupernik, T.L., 1948.4 Schultze, Sydney., 1982.5 Schweitzer, Victoria, 1993.3 Seeley, Frank F., 1968.4 143 Selivanova, Nina Nikolaevna., 1923.3 Semanova, M.L., 1980.4 Sergievsky, Nicholas N., 1946.5 Seymour-Smith, Martin, 1980.5 Shapiro, Gavriel., 1993.3 Shklovskii, Viktor., 1928.1; 1983.8 Shore, Rima., 1979.5 Shtein, A.P., 1962.8 Siegel, George., 1970.8 Silbajoris, Rimvydas, 1965.7 Simmons, Ernest 1., 1943.5; 1946.6; 1972.4 Sirnson, Lucie., 1928.2 Sinyavsky, Andrei., 1969.6; 1975.7 Smyrniew, Walter., 1985.6 Sobolev,1u.V., 1930.2 Speirs, Logan, 1966.5 Stableford, Tom., 1981.10 Steffensen, Egil., 1986.4 Stern, J.P., 1957.5 Stilman, Leon, 1952.4 Strakhov, Nicholas, 1925.1 Strakhovsky, Leonid 1., 1953 .3 Straus Pelikan Nina, 1994.7 144 Struve, G1eb., 1961.2 Sturman, Marianne., 1965.8 Styan, J .L., 1972.5 Terras, Viktor., 1969.7; 1998.1 Thomas, Boris, 1972.6 Thomas, M.D., 1977.7; 1979.6 Thorlby, Anthony., 1987.6 Toumanova, Nina Andronikova., 1937.1 Trilling, Lione1., 1955.4 Tulloch, Alexander., 1982.6 Tulloch, John, 1980.6 Turbin, V.N., 1996.3 Van Kaam, Adrian and Katherine Healy., 1967.10 Viduetskaia, I.P., 1985.7 Vinogradov, Viktor Vladimirovich., 1987.7 Vladykina, I.G., 1959.7 Waddington, Patrick, 1981 .1 1 Wain, John, 1968.5 Wasiolek, Edward, 1993.4 Weathers, Winston, 1956.2 Weidle, Vladimir., 1949.4 Weitz, Morris, 1963.2 Wellek, Rene., 1962.9 145 Welty, Eudora, 1978.5 Werth, Alexander., 1925.2 White, Andrew D., 1947.2 Wiener, Leo., 1924.4 Wilks, Ronald, 1982.7 Williarnes, J. Lee., 1989.10 Williams, Raymond, 1966.6 Wilson, Edmund, 1950.5 Winner, Thomas G., 1956.3 Woodward, B. James, 1978.6; 1978.7; 1982.8 Woolf, Virginia, 1934.2 Yarmolinsky, Avrahm., 1926.3; 1931.1; 1947.3 Zeldin, Jesse., 1978.8 Zlobin, Vladimir., 1980.7 Zonova, D., 1955.5 Zoshchenko, Mikhail., 1974.6 146 1'"‘1'11111111111111.1111"